TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

CFRProflcopter Archive

View 75 posts and 4,471 comments by CFRProflcopter on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
35

Mod PostCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 05:13 PM
29

Obvious, but...CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/14 03:17 PM
28

ReportsCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/14 05:35 PM
22

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 06:58 PM
20

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/14 12:14 AM
19

Post for ModsCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/14 05:06 PM
19

Notice:CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 01:27 PM
19

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/14 02:52 PM
16

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/14 04:03 PM
15

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/14 08:11 PM
14

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/14 01:56 PM
13

Purple DiscussionCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/14 04:28 PM
13

MetaCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/15 03:19 AM
12

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/15 05:01 PM
12

Mod postCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 02:47 PM
11

Contest ModeCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/14 03:48 PM
11

Mod PostCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 09:25 PM
11

Special PostCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/14 09:15 PM
11

Mod PostCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 02:56 AM
11

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/14 11:22 PM
11

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/14 03:39 PM
11

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/14 01:34 AM
11

Feedback neededCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/14 09:10 PM
11

June SurveyCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/14 09:24 PM
10

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/14 03:06 PM
10

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 03:35 AM
10

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 03:59 AM
10

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/14 03:03 PM
10

Post for ModsCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/14 04:40 PM
10

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/13 05:39 PM
10

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/14 06:39 PM
10

DiscussionCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 01:42 PM
10

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/14 10:10 PM
9

Mod PostCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/14 07:58 PM
9

New ModsCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/14 06:46 PM
9

Update:CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/15 02:59 AM
9

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/13 03:20 PM
9

RoE 2CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/14 10:12 PM
9

Purple DiscussionCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/14 02:11 PM
9

??CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 08:21 PM
9

State of PPDCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/14 02:35 PM
9

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/15 04:28 PM
9

DiscussionCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/14 02:30 PM
9

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/14 02:43 PM
8

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/14 02:05 PM
8

Purple DiscussionCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/14 01:56 AM
8

June SurveyCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/14 07:31 PM
8

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 08:10 PM
8

11/27 - 12/3CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/14 02:11 PM
8

Question for RedPillCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 08:49 PM
8

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/14 03:17 PM
8

11/19 - 11/26CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 01:00 AM
8

Read me if you dareCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/14 12:40 AM
7

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/13 02:45 PM
7

DebateCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/14 03:25 PM
7

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/13 02:17 PM
6

New Survey?CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/14 01:49 AM
6

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/13 12:26 AM
6

Question for BluePillCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/15 07:21 PM
6

DiscussionCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/14 01:24 AM
6

Mod PostCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 05:46 PM
6

Mod postCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 12:32 AM
5

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 07:47 PM
5

CMVCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 06:57 PM
5

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/14 07:04 PM
4

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/14 04:32 PM
4

Survey is still live!CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/14 02:01 AM
4

BansCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/15 09:31 PM
3

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/14 08:59 PM
3

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/14 02:35 PM
3

StickyCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/14 04:30 PM
3

SurveyCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/15 01:49 AM
2

NewsCFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/14 05:20 PM
1

CFRProflcopter/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/15 03:50 PM
0

CFRProflcopter/r/RedPillWomen26/07/13 09:01 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 4,471 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
5

I don't think reddit has a censorship problem. I think reddit has a communication problem and a delusions problem. TRP is never getting banned. It simply doesn't break any of the reddit rules, regardless of how vague those rules are. FPH was banned for breaking the harassment policy, which (for once) was clearly explained to all the mod teams in May. The reality of FPH was that the mods were all dicks. They allowed cyberbullying on a large scale. Regarding communication, I think everyone already…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/15 03:32 PM
1

Who says a safe space equates to coddling feelings? Feelings aren't coddled on TRP, but TRP is a safe space. I think you're making assumptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/15 02:25 PM
1

I think that a vigorous debate with all viewpoints is the best result possible, but can I request that we drop this "safe space" BS? All spaces are safe spaces. The only relevant question is, for whom is the space safe? TRP is a safe space for RPers. TBP is a safe space for those that disagree with TRP. We want to make this sub a safe space for both.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/15 02:19 PM
2

There are actually more RP mods than BP mods now that Spartacus is gone, fyi. And yes, the new rules are intentionally subjective.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/15 08:31 PM
3

rhetoric "language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect on its audience, but often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content."
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/15 07:13 PM
2

Whenever you respect people's "right" to not be offended, it always ends in disaster. Authoritarianism, even with good intent, will never end well; and indeed such reasoning marks the exact moment in the slippery slope to SJW style "safe-spaces" where offending opinions (i.e, simply opinions and words) are censored. If opinions and ideas really offended someone, they simply should close the monitor and take a nice run outdoors (both pills included). But how is it fair for us to maintain a safe s…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/15 02:14 AM
7

JP knows what he's talking about. Don't listen to people when they say it isn't representative of TRP. It absolutely is.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/15 12:48 AM
2

If they harass you, let us know. But ultimately we're just trying to crease discourse and disagreement, which is fundamental to any debate. To have two sides of a debate, we need to be welcoming to both sides. Clearly, we've done a pretty shitty job being welcoming to BPers.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/15 12:46 AM
3

This policy is an attempt to make a happy medium safe space, where reasonable people feel comfortable contributing. That may ostracize some people at either extreme, but I think we're OK with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/15 12:42 AM
1

We cannot tell people what to think. We are now asking that people are open-minded. If they are being obstinate and just here to troll or make people frustrated, then we'll ban them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 10:30 PM
2

If a reasonable person would feel attacked, then we'll step in. What's "reasonable" is really up to us. We have a diverse mod team to hand these types of things and ensure that everyone gets a fair shake.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 10:27 PM
1

Thanks for the laughs, dumbass. This is a warning. The next time we have to speak with you, it will be a temp-ban.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 08:04 PM
2

A good chunk of TBP believes that some ideas are so hostile that they shouldn't be discussed. Oh? That's honestly news to me. I've never heard that sentiment before. I'm sure that many BPers would prefer that a group like TRP didn't exist on reddit, but that doesn't mean they think that those ideas shouldn't be discussed at all. They probably think that those ideas should be discussed on a different website or forum. I'm surprised you're not in agreement with me, as a mod who likely gets spammed…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:37 PM
5

I believe that would fall under strawman arguments, which is circle-jerking.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:30 PM
4

Edit: had another thought. Maybe a happy medium would be never going beyond 3-4 day bans unless it's a very serious infraction. That'd keep the population of flamers sufficiently low at any given moment but it wouldn't be so serious that discussion can't take place in a mostly unrestricted way. You can flame but you better make sure the guy reaallly deserves it cause it's gonna cost you a few days in the penalty box. We simple don't have the time to put up with bull shit. We will ban people if w…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:29 PM
2

If all they bring is rhetoric, then it will be removed. This post covers that.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:28 PM
3

I'm sure that they would say ideas can be harmful and misguided, but humans are the ones who spread ideas and act on them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:27 PM
5

Nope. That's what we will stick to.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:16 PM
2

No. Where did you gt that idea?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:15 PM
2

it'd be way easier for someone to just make /r/PurplePillDebate2 here on Reddit and run it by their own rules (or lack thereof). That was my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:14 PM
2

Ideas cannot be hostile, only actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:13 PM
3

We're all human beings. We make mistakes.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 05:12 PM
2

This really isn't any different from our rule against personal attacks. If you attack someone, your comment is getting removed, period.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 04:00 PM
5

There's always voat, although we own /v/PurplePillDebate there. You could also start your own subreddit, if you'd like.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 03:59 PM
1

We are considering maintaining a list of approved submitters, or perhaps using the automoderator so that every post from non-approved users has to be approved. (we're talking about posts only, not comments of course)
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 03:58 PM
6

How does someone do an indirect attack? This sounds like some "authentic conversations" tier phrasing. If someone implies that another individual is stupid, rather than outright saying it, that's an indirect attack. Yes whining about downvotes did happen, but the second part? Not so much, what RP complained about and what was initially provided was free space the opposite of your safe spaces. Your wrong. RPers absolutely complained that this wasn't a safe space. Quite frequently, actually. The c…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 03:56 PM
3

So be it. We want this to be a place where reasonable open-minded people (regardless of ideology) are not afraid to post and comment. If that decreases the size of the user base, we really don't care.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 03:52 PM
4

The thing is, posts are still upvoted and downvoted. Sorting posts by "hot" will yield a one sided debate, even if karma is invisible. I suppose the alternative is sorting posts a different way by default. I know /r/ChangeMyView has custom default sorting.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/15 03:51 PM
4

No one was banned. People were complaining that we were temp-banning people without warning.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/15 11:33 PM
1

Left -6.63, Libertarian -5.9
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/15 11:17 PM
1

If its started by different people who didn't commit the infractions If they're intending to create a copycat sub with the same intent, then it's ban evasion.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/15 07:59 PM
3

/u/capt-next-a-hoe, /u/Lyraless, /u/Nazrath2112, and /u/obstinatebeagle, we removed your comments for circlejerking.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/15 04:29 PM
3

Once a ban is in place, it can only be removed by admins or mods. When someone tries to evade a ban, they are banned. These copycats were clear attempts at ban evasion. I don't know how I could explain it more concisely than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 10:55 PM
2

/r/fatpeoplehate
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 10:51 PM
2

We don't judge Q4BP or Q4RP comments by flair.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 05:13 PM
1

Yes. Users flairs have become a bit confusing. We might ditch the pink flair.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 04:00 PM
2

Well we don't hold it against you, but if it clearly should be a question for BP thread, then we want BP primary answers so we may delete comments that don't fit. I mean, you're not ever going to get banned for that type of thing
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 03:39 PM
3

That would be a decent amount of work and would require more mods. An alternative is manually approving each post and maintaining a list of approved submitters that don't require approval for posts.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 03:06 PM
2

There is for us, at least, but you can't see it. When a mod "approves" a comment, a tiny green check mark appears next to it that only mods and admins can see. When you hover over that check mark, you can see which mod approved the comment. It's actually a very handy feature that we already utilize.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 02:59 PM
1

This is one of the problems we're trying to sort out. I think we need to clearly define how posts are flared. That way each OP is reponsible for flairing their post.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 02:18 PM
2

Yeah, that was just a temporary measure. It wasn't intended to be permanent. The mods are discussing alternatives as we speak.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 01:52 PM
2

Are you kidding? The SRS mods always did whatever the admins said. They even implemented a bunch of rules to cut down on brigading and it deatroyed the subreddit. Now they barely get any traffic. If the FPH mods had sone the same thing FPH would still be around.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 11:48 AM
3

It wasn't for doxxing. It was for breaking the new policy on cyberbullying: http://www.redditblog.com/2015/05/promote-ideas-protect-people.html?m=1 The new rules state tha you can't target individuals and mock them, on or off reddit. No more witch hunts.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 03:21 AM
2

http://www.redditblog.com/2015/05/promote-ideas-protect-people.html?m=1 That was the new policy. They basically gave everyone a month to comply. FPH failed. Edit: Note that all the banned subs got verbal warnings. Aparently the FPH mods just laughed it off.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 03:01 AM
3

I loved that sub and I thought the mods were absolutely hysterical. That was part of the problem. They were bullies. A month ago, reddit expanded their rules against harassment and cyberbullying. The FPH mods ignored those rules and sanctioned harrassment inside and outside their community. The admins don't give two fucks how funny you are or how popular you are. They care if you enforce the rules. It's that simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 12:42 AM
5

It should. TRP isn't going to get banned any time soon. For all of TRP's faults, harassment outside the community isn't one. The mods can be opinionated assholes, but they're smart opinionated assholes and they know how to appease the admins. That's all that matters. The mods on FPH were obstinate dicks who thought they were better than the admins. They never should have been put in charge of a large subreddit. They fucked themselves with their own actions. Any intelligent moderator will tell yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/15 12:36 AM
14

And then responded to being called out with "tits or GTFO." It was his 6th removed comment in a few days so we temp banned him.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/15 03:27 AM
6

That user has been banned.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/15 01:43 AM
1

I don't mean a case of the research itself being unethical or destructive, but where the resulting understanding is ethically negative. If I want to better understand a certain disease, there are of course various unethical ways to go about it, but trying to gain an understanding of the disease itself should not be considered negative. I'm not sure if that's ever happened. I guess what you mean is gaining an understanding of evolution does not require us to DO anything unethical. Yes. I'm curiou…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 08:38 PM
2

The foundation of morality and ethics are subjective. Formal ethics seems like how to be logically consistent AFTER accepting subjective moral stances. I'm not quite sure what you are talking about. Ethics often uses "if" statements. If X is "good," then Y must also be good and Z must be bad. Alternatively, it might be based on assumptions. When those assumptions hold true, the ethical assertion also must hold true. Interesting. What things should we not research due to them having negative ethi…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 01:19 PM
2

You wrote: "morality is a key component of any debate." But it is a key component of every debate. With every argument you make you ask yourself, "is this ethical?" You just cited two examples where the answer to that question is yes. Sometimes the answer is no.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 11:57 AM
2

Not always. As you stated morality is subjective. Subjectiveness can only be quasi-logical but it is not objectively logical i.e. morality may follow some sort of internal logic that is subjectively credible but it is not universally logical insofar as other sets of (equally or more credible) logic can be used to discredit the subjective logic employed. (See e.g. abortion debate; minimum wage debate). But I digress. When we're talking about "morality," we're talking about ethics right? Ethics is…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 03:04 AM
1

All bans are for spam. Why would they censor that site? The could censor racist shit or Roosh V, but they don't. That shit is way worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 01:54 AM
1

What does the banning of websites that spam reddit have to do with censorship?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 01:02 AM
9

Manson is aligned with TRP thought, and often his "Models" book is recommended reading. Some people do take issue with some of his approach, e.g. the vulnerability thing, but there are always a few quibbles. I disagree. Have you read any of his blogs? For this reason, I see a lot of the bickering over gender roles, hypergamy, polyamory and monogamy, fidelity and promiscuity as not-so-sophisticated forms of politics, often promulgated by unknowing actors and actresses, so certain in how right the…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 01:00 AM
2

subjective morality All morality is subjective, but it's still derived from logic. Also, morality is a key component of any debate. can only reach one conclusion I disagree. TRP is not a science nor is it even marginally scientific, so we're debating beliefs. It's natural that there are going to be many different answers to the questions posed, none of the clearly right or wrong. Thus their choice is either convert or become willfully ignorant lest the suffer from high degrees of cognitive disso…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/15 12:14 AM
2

This doesn't seem related to the OP. Wrong thread?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/15 10:25 PM
4

As hyperrreal said, sites get banned for spamming, not for content. AVfM is probably baned because they were using reddit to generate traffic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/15 10:24 PM
3

Scientists and creationists claim that they are right for the same reason? I don't think so. They're also much less unjustifiably smug than some of the people who have been active on PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/15 08:26 PM
2

Can we have some o' them apples to bring some fresh bloopers in then ? I don't know if it will be worth all of the complaining, to be honest. That'd be true enough. Only one sides got a real teason to feel that way though :) The fact that they would say the same exact thing leads me to believe that you're both wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/15 06:05 PM
4

Just like their circle jerking "last year" drove all us away... Oh, wait ! Here we are. But it did drive you away. There was a point where there were no more than 5 or 6 RPers that commented here among a sea of BPers. We had to implement mod policies that diversified the user base. I know you like to think that you're a special snowflake, but it was our policies that changed the demographics of the sub. The bloopers who actually debated and talked to us all ended up taking purple and black flair…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/15 05:40 PM
1

EDIT: Just noticed. Not a single Blooper on the thread. 6 7 RP guys on thread, admitting points the other side made are correct(ish). Not one Blooper. How many blue pillers are actually active in PPD these days. Like 5, maybe? Red Pillers have driven nearly all of them away with endless circlejerking. Seriously, I thought the BP circlejerking was bad a year ago. You guys took it to a whole new level. Now there's no one (or barely anyone) left to even answer these types of questions.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/15 04:39 PM
1

Well those assholes will get shaddow banned, while the people who accidentally vote brigade won't get shaddow banned. That's the point of NP links.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 09:53 PM
1

...yes? What's your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 08:40 PM
1

I think a lot of people get shadow banned for accidentally brigading. NP links prevent that.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 07:59 PM
1

Sorry. I meant that the post was brief.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 07:58 PM
1

I think you're misreading it. I never said it was temporary.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 07:52 PM
1

Which is why we got rid of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 06:22 PM
1

It's not supposed to make it harder. It supposed to remind people, "this is an NP link, do not vote." It prevents incidental brigading.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 06:16 PM
1

It was never meant to prevent brigading, only to discourage brigading and alert us to potential brigading.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/15 06:08 PM
1

I should clarify. We tag stuff with CMV if is states a RP or BP opinion, OR if it state an opinion that is clearly opposed to either RP or BP. Basically any opinion will generally get a CMV flair.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/15 11:15 PM
5

We changed the flair. Any post that clearly states a RP or BP opinion is tagged CMV. The motto of the sub is "question what you believe." Presumably if you make a post stating you're opinion, then you're looking for someone to challenge that opinion. That is the function of CMV posts. Presumably /u/Cyrusk4 wants his opinions challenged if he's posting them in this subreddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/15 11:03 PM
0

This could easily be framed as an advice post.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/15 11:18 PM
0

You said, "I lean mostly red."
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/15 12:57 AM
3

Well heads ups, we don't allow question from RPers directed at RPers or questions from BPers directed at BPers. This sub is specifically for disagreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 10:37 PM
0

So, I lean mostly red Maybe you could have asked this question in /r/AskTRP?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 09:41 PM
0

I'm sorry?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 04:18 PM
0

Right, but I was addressing the "is it new" component.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 03:57 PM
-2

Sure, but TRP is not groundbreaking advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 03:57 PM
0

Not necessarily. If a lawyer thinks he can easily win a settlement, then he'll take the case for free and take a portion of the settlement. Historically, these have been million dollar cases, so there's quite a bit of money to be earned.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 03:55 PM
1

As for censorship, I'm saying progressive ideology can censor things, not necessarily literary, but outright ban (censor) drugs and alcohol. I honestly don't think these two concepts are related. Physical substances cannot be equated with speech. Besides, the organized criminals that the progressives were targeting with prohibition were barriers to freedom. They operated monopolies and silenced anyone who spoke out against hem. By banning alcohol, they thought they would allow for more freedom. …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 03:53 PM
0

From the OP "RP is a bad solution to a real actual problem, probably because it is the first attempt to solve it..." Groundbreaking, as in it's the first attempt to solve a problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 03:07 PM
0

This is a CMV post, is it not? I was disagreeing with a component of the origional post.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 02:56 PM
1

Not to get off topic, but progresses pushed for prohibition during the same time they got women the right to vote. Yes and no. Some progressives (not all) pushed for prohibition, sonce they viewed it as a way to end mob rule and government corruption in urban areas. I'm sure they're fine with censorship if it suits their agenda of a more ideal world, but it depends on your progressive ideology. My use of progressivism slants more towards the "regressive" aspects of the ideology. Not sure how you…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 02:54 PM
2

This is how all universities operate accross the globe. It's also how most companies operate. Preponderance of the evidence is the default standard in most disuputes.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 02:20 PM
1

True, but it has been heavily censored and restricted by a blue pill society. Political correctness and progressivism have help obscure the details and make the practical aspects of the advice more difficult to tease out from the blue pill lack of advice. I have a nit to pick. You probably shouldn't use the word, progressivism. Progressives would never advocate censorship. The people on the left who advocate censorship are not progressives. Leftism and progressivism are not synonyms. There may b…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 01:46 PM
0

Have you ever watched 1950s social guidance videos? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HluKd2xT7w
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 01:28 PM
3

It should be said that nearly all campus proceedings use the "preponderance of the evidence" (51%) standard. Accused of cheating on a test? You need to prove your innocence. Accused of doing drugs? Again, you need to prove your innocence. These are not criminal proceedings, so in no way are you legally entitled to anything more than a 50/50 judgement. Now if the university coaims that they expelled you for sexual assualt, you can sue them for defamation. Can they prove that you sexually assaulte…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 12:43 PM
2

The Red Pill is not new or groundbreaking advice. This type of advice has existed for hundreds of years, largely unchanged. It is not an attempt to solve a new problem. It is a continuation of a phenomenon that existed beofore any of us were born.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/15 12:26 PM
1

What's your game? What do you want from us? Why are you posting here? You keep implying that I "want your help." I don't want your help. I'm not a red piller. I'm not looking for dating advice. I'm happily married in a non-RP marriage. This is a neutral community for discussing issues pertaining to /r/TheBluePill and /r/TheRedPill. I came here from /r/TheBluePill, but our mod team has members with different backgrounds. I've made an effort to help you, but at this point you're kinda just acting …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 03:42 AM
2

This is a screen cap of removed threads in the last month. Maybe you could point out the thread to which you are referring. well you're either stupid or lying. Lying about what? Being married? Why would I ever lie about that. What possible motivation could I have? Removing posts? Again why? like i said, i did a live interview just now to disprove all this bullshit. if the female mods are too fucking stupid to post it, that's on them. You can post it yourself, if you would like. That's kinda how …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 03:12 AM
2

because every other post i've made about this has been deleted by a phaggot mod who doesn't know shit about women. Which posts? no wonder you guys never improve. you censor the only relevant comments in here. the comments from a guy that actually fucks women, knows women, teaches about women, and even interviews said women to confirm everything he's saying. I don't need to improve. I'm married. And many of the mods are women, so they're not really worrying about having sex with women. Also, we d…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 02:34 AM
1

Why all the hate for us? Why wouldn't we allow you to oost that?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/15 01:10 AM
5

Just wanted to say that this is a really draining job as is. It can be difficult to handle each comment with the care it deserves. We do our best. Maybe we need more mods. I think /u/hyperrreal covered the "shadowbanning" thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/15 09:29 PM
2

No, dude. It was about rape. As far as the protestors were concerned, she was raped. It has nothing to do with hypergamy. If you don't beleive me, read the wikipedia entry on the subject. Regardless, we're talking about academic feminism. Find me an academic feminist that supports hypergamy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/15 04:15 AM
2

Do you even know what slut walk was? It was about rape. Some chick was raped and the media blamed it on her appearance, so girls responded by dressing "slutty" under the guise of "we should be able to dress the way we want without being raped or being blamed for rape." Regardless, it has nothing to do with hypergamy. And feminism is not against men or masculinity. It fights toxic masculinity. Big difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/15 04:07 AM
2

Yeah, you need to actually read about something before you start arguing against it. You have no idea what you're talking about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergamy#Feminism_and_hypergamy Feminist analysis of hypergamy says the practice needs to be understood in the context of a patriarchial system: men choose attractive partners because they can, and women choose partners with material resources simply because they make life more comfortable. Feminist historians say lower-status families par…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/15 03:55 AM
2

I'm pretty sure the difference is that feminists blame hypergamy on social conditioning, while RPers blame genetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/15 03:43 AM
2

Don't we always?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/15 12:32 PM
1

No personal attacks, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/15 12:17 PM
5

Statistics show that only a very small percentage of people have many partners. Maybe 5% of men and women will have more than 15 partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/15 08:31 PM
3

sex < food < good sex Is this not the same for men? I definitely feel the same way. Bad sex sucks. I would rather go for a walk in the park than have bad sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/15 04:40 PM
1

I believe there is strong evidence for this claim. I cannot claim neurological evidence but I can claim biological and evidence from General human understanding I am sure we share. Would you be willing to share that evidence? Why are girls attracted to hot guys? Because emotions genetically programmed to occur towards evolutionary fit mates occur. That's what lust is. A human description of a genetically programmed urge. The urge can be controlled, but not prevented. What's "hot" though? It chan…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 10:09 PM
1

I'd say the crucial point about the concept I am calling lizard brain is that you have no conscious control over his actions. Now if we're talking neuroscience we can start picking out brain structures and arguing whether it's this one or that one, whether that's a repotllian hangover or a newer addition and so on. One or the other of us might even be right. Pardon my French, but no shit. Obviously we don't have much control over what we're attracted to. Attraction cannot be negotiated. It's eit…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 08:48 PM
1

I changed the flair to CMV, since the post is editorialized.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 07:42 PM
1

The temporal lobe is passing the info (in this case memories) and LB is deciding, with no conscious input, how you should feel about those. I wouldn't say that either. Memory is largely what defines how you feel about someone. When you are younger, you learn that "x" trait is attractive. As an adult, you see "x" trait and you know it's attractive. The amygdala is responsible for the feedback route that reinforces love, lust, or both, but it is not the area of the brain making decisions or determ…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 07:37 PM
1

Thanks for understanding. There's already an upvote button for the posts you like. You can make use of that as much as you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 07:02 PM
1

The source is LB. We don't consciously control the source. I disagree. The amygdala is involved, for sure, but I wouldn't say that lust flows from there. If anything, lust and love flow from memories stored in the temporal lobe.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 06:37 PM
3

This is the Triune Brain theory, and it has been largely discredited by most neuroscientists. Well, maybe discredited isn't the word, but it certainly is outdated. Under this theory, the lizard brain was the limbic system and the mammalian "logical" brain was the neocortex. Regardless of whether this theory is correct or not, watch a video of an enhanced EEG of someone perceiving attraction: https://vimeo.com/6519441 Nearly all the regions stimulated are in the mammalian "logical" neocortex part…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 05:45 PM
2

This is an A+ post FYI, we remove comments like this. It doesn't add anything to the discussion. We generally consider it circlejerking.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 05:26 PM
2

I changed it to a CMV post, as it should be.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/15 05:23 PM
1

But if you strongly dislike something, you're not going to want to date someone who likes that thing. Comparability is a huge part of a relationship. Any married couple will tell you that differences of opinion and pet peeves only grow over time. It is safe and logical to be overcautious by minimizing the potential for disagreement and conflict in the future.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/15 01:02 AM
1

Not wanting to date someone due to partner count goes up there with not wanting to date someone who likes John Cena, likes rap music and sky dives. You can do it, it's your choice, but it isn't anymore reasonable. But those are all reasonable choices. I hate rap. I would never date someone who likes to listen to rap regularly.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/15 09:47 PM
2

it's an insecurity. Not always. Sometimes you just want to date someone that has made similar life choices. I think that's fair. Having commonalities, whether they are casual, philosophical, or political, are an important part of a relationship. Think about it this way. If you were a religious person, and part of your religion was a no-sex-before-marriage mandate, it would be perfectly acceptable to seek partners that hadn't had sex before marriage. No one is going to criticize you decision beca…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/15 09:45 PM
1

You get that this at least sounds like a total reversal from what every single BPer seems to take issue with? That TRPers don't focus enough on their partners, and only on themselves? That we don't care enough about taking care of our partners? Hence the "TRPers treat their SOs like shit!" drum that is constantly being beaten. I don't know why you're so focused on the level/amount of attention. I'm not really talking about that. I'm talking about the kind of attention you give your romantic part…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/15 04:52 PM
1

Nearly all laws are based on philosophy, not evidence. Why is murder against the law? Because it's unfair to take a life. That's a purely philosophical justification.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/15 12:51 AM
1

What if you start pulling away because you're not interested in that part of the relationship anymore? Not that you aren't interested in relationships, not that you aren't interested in a relationship with her, but because you aren't interested in continuing to throw good money after bad when it comes to the amount of energy you put towards your partner in that area. As long as you tell her exactly what you're doing, I don't see a problem. I always think I'm missing something in these rebuttals,…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 11:53 PM
1

I would suggest you read this conversation from down thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/345sb6/the_biggest_misconception_about_trp_that_i_see_on/cqsoiz9 I just don't feel like covering it again.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 11:44 PM
0

Norway has traditional gender roles too. I've not seen solid evidence as to why this is even considered a worthy endeavor. You wouldn't need evidence. It would be a decision based on philosophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 11:43 PM
2

The truth is, it shouldn't (and doesn't, to me) matter what I feel. A psychologist would disagree. How you feel is important. If the people around you make you feel bad, then you should associate with other people. Feelings are the reason we can't agree on dread game. I am arguing about what to do and you are arguing about how it makes someone feel. Yeah, because when you love someone, you shouldn't want to make them feel bad, jealous, or unloved. Women should feel shitty about losing the affect…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 08:58 PM
1

I show her by beginning to withdraw my attention and putting it elsewhere. This may be a gray area, but even this can be defined as emotional/psychological abuse. When you intentionally pull away, it pulls the women in. It's not considered a psychologically healthy way to conduct relationships because you're manipulating and controlling the other persons affection. How would you feel if a women you loved starting pulling away and giving her attention to another man? I'm not asking what you would…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 06:54 PM
1

I do not agree with you, because jealousy is not a fear of loss; it is envy for something you do not have - that is - the constant attention and affection you thought you were always entitled to from the person Dread Gaming you. I think you're wrong. This is how Wikipedia defines jealousy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jealousy Jealousy is an emotion, and the word typically refers to the negative thoughts and feelings of insecurity, fear, and anxiety over an anticipated loss of something of great…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 05:05 PM
1

Right, but I'm just trying to drill down into the nature of morality now. Is doing something which causes jealousy only immoral if I intended to cause jealousy? Yes, I think that intent is a portion of it. That said, even if jealousy is an intentional indirect result of your actions (as you implied with existing in a state of "people want me"), it's still immoral. Way ahead of you. But does that not also harm women? No, not if you're honest with them. It's fully possible that a man could use TRP…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 04:36 PM
1

Talking about my day, if my day included positive female attention: Is that immoral? Or does it only become immoral when I talk about it specifically because it makes her jealous? The effect is the same either way. Active dread, passive dread, it doesn't matter. Any action intended to promoted jealousy is immoral. You've basically already conceded that it's immoral and that you don't care. Experience. Any time I escalate commitment, sex drops. Go exclusive? Less sex. Move in together? Less sex. …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 04:14 PM
1

You know what? I don't really care if it's immoral. I care if it harms her. It doesn't. It could, hypothetically, if it moved into abusive territory. A little jealousy is not abusive. Does it really not harm her? It's immoral because it harms her. Making someone jealous or fearful is psychologically harmful.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 04:07 PM
1

Or you can use it to understand when people are using it on you. Fair enough. Understanding the concept isn't bad. Using it or encouraging it's use is bad. No. I do believe that it's the only way to increase a woman's sex drive beyond her "natural" levels. If a woman believes that she is my only outlet for sex, her sex drive drops to nothing. Do you have any hard evidence for this assertion? Even if you do, that doesn't make it morally justifiable. I'm talking explicitly about the unfairness thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 04:05 PM
1

No more than the concept of marksmanship is amoral despite you being able to use it to kill people. But dread game is designed to actually be used on people. Marksmenship is a skill that can be applied to other pursuits, such as hunting or competitive shooting. They lead to my getting positive female attention, ergo they make her jealous. Do you believe that jealousy is the only way to achieve attraction? That seems to be what you're implying. Dressing well, being well groomed, and lifting make …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 03:57 PM
1

I would be open to your opinion. I think it would hard to argue that the premise of dread game isn't immoral. Perhaps you could talk about specific situations, but from my perspective, any intentionally induced jealousy is immoral. It's pretty black and white for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 03:52 PM
1

Do you think that she'd be happy if I told her my entire sordid sexual history? But she wouldn't want to know your sexual history. She probably would want to know if you were intentionally inducing jealousy. I'm not deceiving her so much as I'm simply withholding information. Unless you're happy to say that women who don't tell their partners their N count are being deceptive? Yes. Both are deceptive. If someone would like to know something and you intentionally withhold that information, that's…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 03:37 PM
1

Eh, I'll cede the fear point, with the caveat that it's very mild. It's not frightening, it's simply a mix of emotions. I hate to say it, but it sounds a lot like rationalization. Let me ask you this, if a plate or an SO or a wife knew that you were intentionally inducing jealousy or fear, do you think she would be happy? I'm gonna go ahead and assume she would be livid. So not only are you inducing fear, but you're also intentionally deceiving her. I'm sorry, but morally, you're not on good gro…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 03:22 PM
1

Can you give me an example or two of such an argument? Specifically, what logically-based moral issues does TBP have with TRP? Not that something "feels manipulative", but something that is actually detrimental in application when used correctly according to TRP. (Genuinely interested) Sure. I had a massive debate with people about dread game yesterday. I would argue that dread game is inherently immoral, or at least the premise is. According to TRP, the object of dread game is to induce jealous…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 03:14 PM
1

I agree completely. I am trying (and maybe failing?) to say that some people claim that it is moral and fair that the man pay for dinners. I agree that it is not the case, but many women have given me this advice: But that's an argument stemming from tradition, not an argument stemming from logical morality or ethics. TBP isn't going to make "moral" arguments from tradition. They're feminists. They're going to use moral/ethical arguments that stem from logic. And TBP's moral arguments are the su…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 03:05 PM
1

a) Dread does not induce fear except in very insecure women (who I would argue don't need it anyway; simply being attractive is more than enough to keep their attention). It's simply about making the other party aware that you don't need them, you are choosing them. TRP's definition: http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2zckqu/updated_glossary_of_terms_and_acronyms/ Dread Game - Purposefully inciting jealousy in an LTR by openly getting attention from other women. http://en.wikipedia.org/…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 03:02 PM
2

I didn't mean to imply that biology does support TRP. I tried to word it to show that biology supports evolution (not creationism). My bad. I completely misread that. For example, "it's fair that the man always pays for dinner" would fall under this category, in my opinion. But that's immoral, partially because it's illogical. If fairness and equitability are synonyms, the example you used is a formal fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 02:52 PM
1

Having an emotional attachment to one action over another doesn't remove the agency of the chooser. This is bunkum. Using fear to achieve an artificially inflated need absolutely does remove the agency of the target individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 02:47 PM
1

What? Agency is an individuals ability to act and make choices. Dread game specifically reduces an individuals ability to make choices.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 01:56 PM
3

/u/Cuittler, /u/hyperrreal, and myself are the only mods that don't use alts in this subreddit. I did for a while, but I stopped. If this is something that most people would prefer, we can consider it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 01:55 PM
1

Yes. One should not seek to instill dread in an acquaintance. Doing so makes them fear losing you, which chips away at their agency. Instilling dread is a direct intentional attempt to remove agency. Direct attempts to remove agency are immoral.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 01:51 PM
-1

I think this is what makes it different than the being a holocaust denier or a creationist, right? We have hard evidence of the former (holocaust happened) and lots of science backing up the latter (modern biology, etc.). I agree TRP doesn't have this level of evidence behind it, but I hope you can see that /u/polyneophite[1] 's statement of: I disagree that biology supports TRP in any way, but other than that you're right. Is a result of moral standing, not logic. Morals are derived from logic.…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 01:49 PM
1

Actually, I'm not saying that at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 01:20 PM
0

I think it mostly has to do with the fact that the workforce was a male created institution for men in order the divy up the work needed for society. Eventually, we started letting more and more women in. I personally don't see gender roles going away ever. Even in places like Sweden, things tend to fall down gender lines and it is considered the most free of choice there. Can I just say that I hate this "even in Sweden" meme? Sweden has traditional gender roles to. Everywhere does. Gender roles…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 12:45 PM
2

Teachers need masters degrees in many states but often get paid shit. That's an example of an undervalued traditionally female profession.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 12:24 PM
4

77 cents on the dollar full time overall is different then 77 cents on the dollar for the same exact work, which is what the wage gap myth addresses, because the latter is simply twisting the truth and propaganda. Right, 77 cents for different work is still a potential problem. That's the devils advocate argument. Some argue that we value traditionally male careers and undervalue female careers.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 12:22 PM
6

The 77% debate still has political relevance. You can make the philosophical argument, "why don't we value traditional women's work?"
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 11:54 AM
2

CMV should be if you actually want your view challenged (hardly the case here); and QfBP/RP should be if you are genuinely curious about the opinion of the one side (and not, as it's here, to ask biased questions intended to make that side look bad). But then maybe no one should be here. The origional slogan of PPD was "question what you believe." We have always maintained that people shouldn't be here if they cannot buy into that philosophy. It is the mantra guides the mods.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 11:48 AM
6

TRP also isn't right. A lot of the gender science aspects of the debate all boil down to nature/nurture, which is a topic that even scientists debate. So no one can be objectively right or wrong on many of these topics. The only real subject of actual debate is morality.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 11:45 AM
3

Recently? The definition I cited is 20 years old.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/15 02:48 AM
5

Everyone, in every relationship, everywhere, that isn't actual slavery is free to stay, and free to go. That's what keeps people honest... that everyone ultimately has the right to vote with their feet. What about people that stay in abusive relationships, despite being miserable?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 07:32 PM
3

Most girls know how to make a guy jealous before the end of their teens, there are celebrated womens best sellers that advocate dread game. Yeah, and it's all emotionally abusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 06:11 PM
-1

True, but there are social norms to contend with. When someone is abused, people generally think less of the abuser. It effects the abusers status within a social group.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:34 PM
2

Can you be specific here? Is there a dread you've witnessed when this happened? I say this because I've never done dread on purpose but I have pretty clear and exceptionally well defended boundaries and I brook no bullshit in their breach. I'm sure there are a few women out there that think I was an abusive asshole, but frankly they are full of shit--I never changed the rules ladies. Honestly, no. I'm really busy and I've wasted enough time this morning. I'll admit that there's a fine line betwe…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:32 PM
3

Of course it's philosophical. Ultimately, it becomes political. There are more "weak" than there are strong, so democracies will always involve some level of protection for the weak.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:26 PM
4

What if a girl has a tendency to yell when arguing? If I tell her that's one of my boundaries and walk away when she does it. Am I abusive? Of course not. That's a fair boundary.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:23 PM
-2

Yeah, a lot of people criticized He’s Just Not That Into You for being sexist. Women are just as likely to commit emotional abuse as men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:15 PM
4

It's fair that I have to give up my boundaries because someone else can't make their own decisions? No. You can have your boundaries, but you shouldn't remove the boundaries of others nor take advantage when an individual doesn't have boundaries. Any of this responsible for each other stuff is purely by contract. What about social contracts? Yup. This is why a man needs to be a man. This is why boundaries are so important. This is why we used to tell our sons and daughters about the importance o…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:12 PM
2

Abusive relationships remove or reduce agency.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:08 PM
4

The politics stem from the science. Social dominance orientation is correlated with right-wing authoritarianism as well as broad conservatism. Having high SDO6 generally correlates with the belief that it's OK for the strong to dominate the weak. Most people have lower SDO6 scores, believing that the weak should be protected from the strong.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:07 PM
2

The problem exists when one partner refuses to change, but requires the other partner to make a bunch of changes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:04 PM
-1

What actions? We're a subreddit that denies our membership to TRP when asked in real life. Which actions are you going off here? All you have are words. I'm talking about the behavior on TRP. There's obvious insecurity (link). There's an obsession with women cheating (link). There's an obsession with control. http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/33z0qh/1_year_here_these_are_the_most_important_lessons/ "Forcing myself to always be calm, has made women more comfortable around me - as women …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 05:03 PM
3

It's not really a political issue. This is psychology we're talking about. Science.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:54 PM
6

Seriously, how is that my problem? Why is it impossible for people to be responsible for their own feelings? Because you're damaging their psychological situation to improve your own. It's not fair. I'm responsible for me. You are responsible for you. That's not how the world works. When you get involved with someone as a friend, a co-worker, a boss, a lover, or a parent, your both responsible for each other to a certain extent. You are partially responsible for the well being of others and othe…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:51 PM
-2

TRP doesn't say that. Actions speak louder than words. Many RPers are obsessed with controlling relationships. That attitude oozes out of the subreddit. Control is a great fool-proof way to ensure that your wife/girlfriend never leaves you and never cheats on you. Seriously? That's absolutely insane. Was I abused because my parents had more authority than I did as a kid? Is it abusive if my boss can threaten my livelihood (ie firing me) if I refuse to obey him? This isn't even just reaching. Thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:40 PM
1

That's fine, as long as both partners have the same level of agency.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:36 PM
6

So all women are abusive? Certainly not all, but many women are abusers in relationships. Specifically in this instance, "setting unrealistic standards" refers to setting standards that literally cannot be met while already in some type of relationship, whether it be plate-plate, husband-wife, or boyfriend-girlfriend. TRP doesn't tell you to try and mold women into the person that you want them to be and to punish them if they fail to meet the standard. But you give them an opportunity to change…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:34 PM
2

But you're begging the question that TRP actually is abusive. How do we remove agency? Which tactics do we use? All the ones I listed from the Health Canada article.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:26 PM
2

If the whole relationships is on your terms rather than shared terms, if the relationship is all about her pleasing you, then no it's certainly not good. I suggest you actually read the link to the Health Canada article.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:25 PM
1

We don't do this. We don't make her conform. We only make it clear that we have boundaries and will leave if they are violated. Captain/first-mate model. One person ultimately has the final say. That's an unfair power dynamic. I'm guessing the link you gave is only talking about LTR's? It was talking about all interpersonal relationships. Husband-wife, friend, child-parent, acquaintance, boss, ect. The article specifically don't make a distinction, since all abusive relationships follow basicall…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:24 PM
7

Your comment seems to be based on the assumption that all people have the same level of agency at all times. Abusive relationships remove agency. Why do you think people in abusive relationships stick around despite being miserable? It's because they feel like they don't have a choice. Of course they do have a choice, but they feel like they don't have a choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:15 PM
3

The problem is not having options. The problem is when you consistently flaunt your options, even subtly. It forces your partner into the mentality of "I need to please him or else he will leave." If the behavior is consistent, then she will become obsessed with pleasing you to the point where she looses her individuality. Her life becomes all about pleasing you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:11 PM
2

I already made a comment addressing specifics if you're interested: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/345sb6/the_biggest_misconception_about_trp_that_i_see_on/cqrjt1v
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:03 PM
8

Well, there's no universally agreed upon metrics for emotional abuse, but I tend to agree with Health Canada's interpretation. http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/sfv-avf/sources/fv/fv-psych-abus/index-eng.php In all of these relationships, one party is using various tactics to exert power and control and to diminish another person. In the context of this power imbalance, abuse takes place and causes various types of harm, including emotional and psychological harm. Emotional abuse is all about power and…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 04:01 PM
9

The red piller will just be gone at a moment's notice if she doesn't become those things. I don't think there's any argument to make that these behaviors are abusive. Being prepared to walk away is not abuse. Abuse is aggressive, not just being difficult to keep around. There might be an argument to make that a red piller is an asshole if he only keeps a woman around under the condition of effortless sex, but it's not like he's making himself hard to disassociate with if she's the kind to make t…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 03:25 PM
1

If you have decent grades, you can just apply to another Ivy.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/15 01:48 AM
1

Though a university is a private (or public in a few cases) entity and as such can operate with less oversight; the general public as a whole will not take kindly to an increase in punishment over false accusations because it is the same general public that feels protecting the innocent is more important than punishing the guilty. But expelling someone isn't the same as putting them in jail. An expelled student can easily apply to other schools. And if your response is, "but that expulsion for r…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 09:06 PM
1

And the second part of my comment? it's also rare to expel a kid for rape in a he-said-she-said scenario. There has to be additional evidence, even when the standard of evidence is "preponderance of the evidence."
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 08:24 PM
1

Not the same issue. In that instance, there is in all likely hood some eyewitness testimony on the "attack". You've never worked at an elementary school, have you? Often times there is very little to go on. School administrators have to make a judgement with the available information. It's rare to hand down an expulsion based on the reports of a few kids, but it's also rare to expel a kid for rape in a he-said-she-said scenario. There has to be additional evidence, even when the standard of evid…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 07:29 PM
2

Our legal system sees it differently. Cool. Happy to abide by the legal system, happy to accept any penalty I am handed when I fail to do so. But our legal system is a reflection of our philosophy, is it not? Well it largely should. Every time you assign some the blame to some guy who didn't actually do it... That's a little less blame the guy who did it has to shoulder... Take this attitude too far ? Your argument is based on the assumption that there's a set limit of guilt for every action. I …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 07:00 PM
1

Morality is left up to the guys taking action... Where culpability best resides in any case. My point was that this statement of yours is not true in western culture. Responsibility does not rest solely with the person performing a physical action.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 06:38 PM
1

I already did it for you, so it doesn't matter. Just try to keep it on topic and don't let others draw you away from the topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 06:05 PM
1

40m later and not one reply, and while on TBP I get this There were 15 comments but I removed them all.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 06:02 PM
29

How can we fix things ? Stay away from internet forums concerned with gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 05:58 PM
2

You're conflating advice with information. That's what I take issue with. TRP absolutely does give immoral advice at times.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 05:57 PM
4

The advice is just how to fuck chicks. But advice can be immoral or moral. If the advice suggests taking an immoral action, then the advice is immoral. The guys are responsible for their actions, no one else. That's the core of RP. That's certainly not how our legal system works. If you advise someone how to commit certain crimes, you can be charged with a crime. A great example is suicide. If you advise someone to commit suicide, it's considered "aiding suicide." For a random example, this is M…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 05:41 PM
1

Dealing with any of those crimes is a thing that is way above the universities pay grade, so they should stand aside. The university isn't trying these students. They are attempting to maintain a safe campus by internally dealing with violations of campus safety rules. The university is not trying to determine legal guilt or innocence. Think of it this way, when a 10 year old attacks another 10 year old on the playground, the elementary school expels him. They're not putting him on trial for ass…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 05:32 PM
1

What? We're not talking about rape. We're talking about all crime.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 04:48 PM
3

Here's all the advice/information. Advice and information are not the same thing. Advice encourages a course of action. Information does not encourage a course of action. Advising someone "Buy a gun" is amoral. Only because the action of buying a gun has no moral or immoral qualities. It is a neutral action, thus the advice is also a neutral action. That said, if you advise someone to commit murder with a gun, is that immoral? Most definitely it is. The advice is immoral because the advised acti…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 04:09 PM
1

It's true though. No university would ever volunteer for that role, especially since they'd almost certainly settle or lose the case. Precedent has already been set, and private entities are required to maintain a level of safety on their premises.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 04:03 PM
2

amoral advice. You don't understand amorality, or what that means in the context of TRP. Information (aka what RP calls "RP truths") is amoral. Advice cannot be amoral. Advice encourages a specific course of action which will either be moral or immoral. Advising any action involves a level of culpability, thus any advice must be either immoral or moral.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 03:54 PM
-1

I'm sorry, but that's not realistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 03:41 PM
2

Source? You would need to read through campus policies on arbitration. Each university outlines different procedures, but I've never seen a schools use the reasonable doubt standard of evidence. Doesn't change the fact that that model was created and pushed for by feminists. Yeah, and feminists get stuff wrong all the time. How much clout do you hold in the feminist sphere to influence other feminists to oppose it? Alone? Not much. But a larger pro-feminist group could makea dent.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 12:37 PM
0

What happens when the university is sued for not maintaining a safe environment for students?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 12:31 PM
1

The duluth model was a gain for all women (especially abusive women) and a loss for men (especially abused men). Feminists conceived and brought this to fruition. I'm fully against the duluth model. It's outdated. Not everything feminists do is right. WHOA, WHOA, WHOAAAAAAA. Hold up, let me see if this rings a bell with you. Women who dress provocatively and consciously enter dangerous situations put themselves in danger of rape. I agree with this. It isn't their fault that they get raped, but t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 12:30 PM
1

But that's actual cheating, IMO. Talking with previous parters about previous sexual encounters is emotional cheating. It's not apropriate conversation for someone in a committed relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/15 12:21 PM
0

This is entirely an argument about morality/fairness/justice. Great, so we agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 04:33 PM
0

And that's idiotic because it IS a due process issue. You simply didn't know the broad definition of 'due process'. Just admit it. Of course I know what due process means, but students don't have a constitutional right to due process in university hearings. That's my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 04:28 PM
3

Neither the legal definition of due process or Harvard law agrees with you: There are no laws that guarantee students any rights to due process in university hearings. So yes, it's a student's rights issue because students have no right to due process. A feminist initiative. If everything feminists does hurts men, stop saying we should align ourselves with feminists. That's an awfully big leap you just made.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 04:05 PM
1

OK, when when I mentioned that it's not a "due process issue," I was referring specifically to the 14th amendment: nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law Essentially, I was saying that it's not a violation of the constitution.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 04:03 PM
2

/u/cuittler But I'm going to go ahead and tell you that it was removed because you personally attacked polyhooly here: So for instance, when people like polyhooly come off in real life as "non-gentle-perfect-ethereal-people"(read "I'm an asshole" much like "I don't know how to comment")
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 03:33 PM
0

Both quotes are quite clear: men are the oppressors. Not everybody sees the concept of patriarchy in the exact same way, I do understand that. But this "men are the oppressors, women are oppressed" world-view is hardly a fringe idea in the movement. It's quite mainstream within feminism, from my experiences. It's a complicated issue. Traditionally, men have held nearly all positions of power. Thus men had the ability to remove patriarchy, but chose not to. In that way, they are unknowing oppress…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 03:24 PM
0

You apparently don't know what the definition of due process is I'm talking about the constitutional requirement for due process, which doesn't apply to internal university proceedings.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 03:17 PM
1

As i pointed out in the other comment, feminists are destroying due process/presumption of innocence of men on campus. This isn't really a due process issue. It's a students rights issue, and it's absolutely not limited to rape. Nearly all proceedings on campus do not have a presumption of innocence. Using the same standard of evidence for rape or assault is not particularly unusual or unprecedented, considering nearly all other campus incidents are settled in the same manor. Also, thanks to fem…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 03:15 PM
2

It's our policy to remove whole exchanges if they veer off the tracks. If you have any questions, I didn't personally removed these comments so you should ask the mod that did.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 03:10 PM
2

But in this case, the social expectation is that men only care about looks. The fact that the study finds otherwise is absolutely significant.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 03:04 PM
3

It's funny, I get yelled at by a mod for calling someone a boob, yet you terps pull shit like this all the time. Really, you're trying to insult me over the reply button? To be fair, we removed this whole conversation starting with /u/rafay_M 's comment. It's not exactly biased moderation when everyone is being a boob.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 02:11 AM
0

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 01:50 AM
-3

Due process applies to the justice system. Campus arbitration is not part of the justice system.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 01:49 AM
1

Patriarchy is a social system. Like any other social system, it is a living breathing entity that evolves as it is passed down from generation to generation. That's not feminism, it's just general sociology.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 01:46 AM
0

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 01:13 AM
1

But it is philosophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 01:11 AM
0

There's a certain world-view associated with mainstream feminism, and it's based around an oppressor/oppressed gender dichotomy (where men are the oppressors and women the oppressed). It includes many beliefs, like the idea that sexism against men doesn't exist ("sexism = prejudice + power, and men but not women have power"), life is much better for men ("male privilege is rampant, female privilege isn't even a thing"), and any problems men face are just side-effects of male power, misogyny, and…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 01:09 AM
1

It depends entirely on your philosophical interpretation of the situation. Do you view inaction as action? If so, then the landlord is unknowingly punishing the plaintiff. By not acting, the landlord is acting. The court ruled that the school wrongfully expelled and defamed him, based on the evidence. This is the important part. The student won the lawsuit not just because the university expelled him, but because they listed the reason for expulsion as sexual assault. Legally, the university can…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/15 01:02 AM
1

How is it men's fault that they're more likely to be victimized by crime? OK then, why are men more likely to be victims of violent crime? Women's rights can be increased at no cost to men, feminist ideals cannot be though. But why? At least for now though, republicans are blocking feminism at least a little bit. For conservative religious issues. The religious right is never going to support the MRM. by the time Hilary or Warren gets into the whitehouse if a republican wins in 2016. Come again?…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 11:50 PM
0

What I'm saying is that it's not punishment at all. That action does not fall under the definition/concept of punishment as it's used in western society. It depends entirely on your philosophical interpretation of the situation. Do you view inaction as action? If so, then the landlord is unknowingly punishing the plaintiff. By not acting, the landlord is acting. In an eviction, the matter is settled in a real court, where due process occurs. Right, because the punishment is handed down and enfor…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 11:45 PM
0

That's not a useful metric. Women's protection is enormously higher than what it needs to be and men's is absolutely dwarfed. Men are more likely to be involved in crime, but that's our own fault. Men seek out violent situations. Beyond that, men are more likely to die in war, but feminists are the ones fighting to change that by advocating for women in combat roles. 2008 was a big year. Mensrights and the rest of the manosphere is getting huge and doing a great job of spreading information. You…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 11:30 PM
1

It's not arguable at all. The amount of violence men face absolutely dwarf's what women face. We're not talking about violence faced, but rather vulnerability to violence. Absolutely not. Feminists are anti-male. You can't succeed without dismantling it. Fortunately for men's groups, most people aren't feminists and men's groups have much better empirical information. It's a long fight but I think they'll eventually get traction. This is exactly why anti-feminist men's groups will fail. They've …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 10:49 PM
0

Again, I don't think 'punished' is the correct term. If the landlord does not know the truth of what happened, and I have insufficient evidence for my claim, not acting is neither the infliction of a penalty nor is it treating me roughly. Therefore it is not punishment. It's not knowing punishment. The landlord is punishing you without being aware of it. It's not a malicious act, it is merely a result of inaction. be evicting someone without sufficient evidence to know the facts of what happened…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 10:41 PM
3

I think you're right, to an extent. In a few limited ways, society is protective of women more so than men. Of course women's groups are better organized than men's groups. Women's groups are also more effective at gaining sympathy from the population. With greater resources, they can implement programs to aid women. Mens groups are horribly disorganized and occasionally hateful. They cannot procure the necessary resources to actually implement programs that help men. Furthermore, it's arguable …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 10:17 PM
-2

I don't know about this. An institution not acting because of a lack of evidence is not the same thing as punishment. If I make a complaint to my apartment complex about a neighbor, and the complex doesn't act because I can't offer enough evidence to back up my narrative, I'm not being punished. Well, in your example, the lack of action from your landlord is indirectly punishing you. In our western legal system, the standard of evidence is very high since conviction has serious consequences. How…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 09:16 PM
1

I mean, that's the definition of the 80/20 rules not working.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 08:28 PM
2

The men were the plates. The women were the plate spinners. The women realistically wouldn't tolerate the men sleeping around. Only the women could sleep around and get away with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 07:48 PM
1

Philosophically, this is actually a really interesting topic. It's arguable that allowing a real rapist to remain on campus is just as harmful as expelling a falsely accused rapist. In the first instance, your forcing a legitimately raped women to attend school with her rapist. In the second scenario, you're expelling an innocent man. In both situations, you're punishing someone harshly. Thus the 50/50 nature of the preponderance of the evidence standard could absolutely be justified in a univer…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 07:42 PM
2

you boob. You've earned your fair share of leeway from the mods over time, but this is a personal attack.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 07:34 PM
0

Jealousy may not be enough if you have little choice but to share your guy - because if you don't offer it, another woman surely will (and it's a society where polygamy is totally acceptable, remember?). There was an interesting article posted at TRP (where else) about the lopsided gender balance at some universities and how that affected the dating scene. One of the female students basically said "there are 40% men studying here, of which 20% are undatable and from the other 20% half is already…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 04:01 PM
1

That said, I would be really curious how it would pan out if polygamy was fully accepted socially and we also didn't have a monogamy-oriented culture (which would basically burn down to women having made their peace with the idea that it's okay to share a great guy and that they can't expect exclusiveness), i.e. how many women would actually sign up for this. I bet monogamy would still reign. I realize that some members of TRP like to tout the "women thrive in harems" stuff, but the evidence jus…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 03:30 PM
3

I was talking about long term relationships, not sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 04:18 AM
6

In relation to the previous thread? No, it's not. I questioned Sandman's argument since it wasn't supported by the study he linked. I don't see how that's relevent to the current thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/15 01:36 AM
2

I realize that all attraction requires a certain hormonal component in our own heads, but being in a relationship with someone who's hormones cycle monthly makes it - to a small degree - like being in a relationship with someone who has some degree of bipolar issues. That's a little scary. This is what it boils down to. That's a little scary. I'm sorry? There's not much you can do. Thankfully, women are human beings and can make rational decisions. They don't just act based on instinct. The arti…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 11:00 PM
5

Because it's off topic. If you want to have this conversation, you can take it to the original thread. I don't want to discuss previous threads in this thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 09:46 PM
5

not exactly dangerous and violent You could say that again. though we can assume that dangerous and violent guys should be more likely to display these traits than your average "good dad"-guy You know what they say, assuming makes an ass out of you and me.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 09:42 PM
5

But you have no idea about the specifics. You're just talking out of your ass. Based on the article, you cannot claim that anyone was treated "like dirt."
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 09:40 PM
3

it seems males still far and away rate physical attractiveness for both types relationships no matter how the data is collected. 33 out of 100 points is not "far an away" by any definition I've ever heard.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 09:38 PM
6

There were actually five studies described in that paper. Not all of them were surveys, and they all found roughly the same results, including the studies designed to test implicit preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 08:13 PM
5

Actually, This study (pdf) found that "hottness" and tendency to "put out" is only 33% of what factors into an average man's ideal long term partner. So what kind of stability is a woman that doesn't work or earns less going to add? According to the same study found that "social status/economic resources," which was shorthand for a partner's income/wealth, were 27% of what a man considered in a female long-term partner. The remaining 39% was allocated to "warmth/trustworthiness." So it appears t…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 08:08 PM
8

Yeah, because you said: Haselton/Gangestad paper. Women are drawn to dangerous and violent types and are more disdainful of and adverserial towards passive and meek guys when ovulating, but actively seek out the company of the latter over the former when they're not. Do the math. Then you linked to a study that found women are more attracted to symmetrical faces when they're ovulating. So I responded with this: It simply asked women if they were attracted to other men. It did not define or attem…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 07:57 PM
9

Care to point out where I questioned that line of reasoning? I don't see any conflicts.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 07:43 PM
5

And what were the actual numbers involved? The results?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 07:41 PM
6

That's not what studies on the subject have found. http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/HomePage/Group/LiLab/LiKenrick2006.pdf The study in the link above found drastic differences between what men value in short-term and long-term partners. In the high budget study, men only allocated 33/100 points for physical attraction in long-term mates. For short-term mates, they allocated 64/100 points. That's a massive difference. According to this study, men cared more about "warmth and trustworthiness" than …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 07:38 PM
2

I had to remove your post. A small portion of it disagreed with the OP, but the majority of it was not really in conflict with anything the OP said. If you edit it to focus more on the disagreement, I can reinstate it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 07:23 PM
9

The emphasis was more on the fleeting part, but regardless, they aren't treating their partners "like dirt." We all have fleeting feelings of negativity towards our partners. "like dirt" is a massive exaggeration.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 07:11 PM
9

treat their committed BB like dirt during these periods That's certainly not what the study said: Nevertheless, the negative feelings appear fleeting, and they don't seem to affect a woman's long-term commitment to her romantic relationship, the study found.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 07:08 PM
18

I'm always amazed that people are shocked by these types of things. Women are attracted to attractive men when they're horny? You don't say. Women settle for slightly less attractive partners because of the stability they offer? Wow, so do men. It's not exactly ground-breaking stuff. The only major gender difference here is a woman's monthly cycle.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/15 06:35 PM
5

That too, although it doesn't happen very often.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/15 11:35 PM
0

I don't know why you have to turn it into a men versus women thing. It shouldn't be a competition to see who is most oppressed. The reality of social sciences is that questions are much harder to answer definitively. Often we're left asking the question, "why," and filling in the blanks with inductive reasoning. Occasionally there are multiple conclusions available, some of which directly contradict each-other. Evolutionary psychology is a great example. You can easily use the same evo-psych stu…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/15 07:24 PM
9

You're right. Other subs will ban you based on comment history. We won't. We will, however, ban people if they link their own comments in /r/TheBluePill or /r/SubredditDrama.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/15 07:15 PM
3

a pretty even split between removed RP and BP posts/comments. To clarify, the ratio of comments removed is almost exactly the same for RP and BP. If 2/3 of comments of from Red Pillers, then normally 2/3 removed comments are from Red Pillers. It is an important distinction.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/15 07:13 PM
1

True, but mostly because they probably had a vagina, not because they misidentified a fedora.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:58 PM
1

But the OP didn't say whether she was specifically seeking out white guys or whether white guys just happened the be the only ones she dated. Her friends said “she only dates white guys,” but she never said it herself. If she feels the same way, then it could be problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:56 PM
-1

That's irreverent. I thought we were talking about a hypothetical scenario, not real life.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:50 PM
1

Shit, didn't even think of that. That's funny, because the test used an image of a trilby.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:48 PM
1

I just spent 5 minutes looking for it and I can't find one.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:32 PM
3

Well, actually I lost even earlier because I am opposed to thinking girls shouldn't be obligated to do anything. "Not being obligated to do anything" sounds actually pretty shitty and I bet dollars to donuts that the folks who designed that test wouldn't give guys the same amount of leeway. You're taking the question too literally. Like I said in another comment: It's the classic, "do you objectify women" question. If your initial answer is yes, then it demonstrates that you are judging women fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:29 PM
1

It was rhetorical, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:27 PM
-1

It depends, are they only dating a certain race because that's their only option, or are they racist?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 11:25 PM
2

in all honesty I did want to take the wind out of the sails of that joke. I guess I always thought the whole situation was kind of funny. Feminists /r/niceguys are ripping on niceguys, RedPillers in the manosphere are ripping on niceguys. No one can really agree on what a niceguy is. It's one of the reasons I reddit requested /r/nicegirls. I think the whole dynamic represents the goofy essence of the internet gender wars.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 09:52 PM
0

Do I feel women are obligated to do anything? No. Do I have preferences for women who do certain things? Yes of course. It's the classic, "do you objectify women" question. If your initial answer is yes, then it demonstrates that you are judging women first and foremost based on their sexual qualities. If you're answer is no, then your first instinct is to think of women as human beings rather than potential sexual partners. But as I said in the edit, I didn't intend for the test to be taken 100…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 09:45 PM
1

This test is skewed against participants of ppd. Most of us would fail on the "friendzone" question, because that topic is one of the most popular ones here. Yeah, I edited the OP. I wrote this post half as a joke. I didn't really intend for anyone to take it so seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 09:39 PM
0

Are women obliged to shave their legs?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 09:13 PM
1

Care to elaborate?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 09:12 PM
1

I feel like you ignored the gist of my comment. Who's to say good long term partners are all unattractive? That's a bit presumptuous. That said, if you are actually not attracted to her at all, then I would say you haven't had a change of heart. Presumably you're lying to her about your attraction, which makes it even worse. This was the meat of my previous comment. Do you agree or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 09:11 PM
2

Two things. One, your story is based on the assumption that after the change of heart, you settle for someone less attractive. Who's to say good long term partners are all unattractive? That's a bit presumptuous. Secondly, if I do take your story as it was written, my answer is maybe. Maybe you're not genuinely as attracted to her as you were to your previous partners, but you can still be dedicated to the relationship. Why does your current partner have to be the most attractive person you ever…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 08:31 PM
0

We all make mistakes when we're younger. We date the wrong people for the wrong reasons. A genuine change of heart would involve realizing our past mistakes and making an effort to avoid those mistakes in the future.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 07:59 PM
0

But if we were to apply OP's situation to the book analogy, his friend didn't give the book away to Goodwill, she burned it. What? No. Incinerating the book is equivalent to murdering /u/Xenakis_Muse. Last time I checked, /u/Xenakis_Muse is still alive (I hope). She didn't destroy the book, she gave it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 06:50 PM
1

Do you throw it out the first chance you get? If I no longer value it, then obviously yes, I would donate it to goodwill. Why would you want to keep things you don't value? That's hording.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 05:47 PM
3

Yeah, if Gale moves on, then she doesn't value the friendship now, but that doesn't mean she never valued the friendship.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 05:41 PM
5

Last time I checked, you don't make life-long vows with friends. Friendships come and go, but it doesn't mean that people don't value them. Yeah, if Gale moves on, then she doesn't value the friendship now, but that doesn't mean she never valued the friendship.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 05:32 PM
2

Keep it on topic, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 05:15 PM
1

The second. We try to separate q's for BP and RP so that everyone can be heard.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 05:14 PM
3

Sorry for the WebMD link, but I think this nicely sums it up: http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/features/loss-of-libido-in-men Losing interest in sex may not be as common an occurrence for men as it is for women: It affects about 15% to 16% of men, and at least double that many women. "But when men lose interest in sex it scares them more than women -- their masculinity is so linked to their sexuality that it is very threatening," says Esther Perel, a couples therapist in New York city and …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 03:08 PM
6

If she'd said she'd never date an Asian man in the past though, I'd definitely be more cautious. I agree. I think BP, RP, and anyone else will agree with this one, for the most part. It's a red flag unless she had a genuine change of heart at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 03:04 PM
1

Redpillers, what evidence do you have for its existence? You should make a separate thread. These are two very different questions.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 02:51 PM
6

But I think there is a valid nit to pick, here. Just because a man maintains interest in his current partner, it doesn't mean that his interest in alternative partners stays low. After all, men stray from their relationships just as frequently as women do. Men may be maintaining their sexual interest in their current partners, while experiencing rises in sexual interest towards other partners. So what matters is in-relationship sexually attraction relative to external sexual attraction. It's als…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 02:46 PM
6

I have three independent points to make. First, I think the word you're looking for is free market, not capitalist. They are not always synonyms. Also, most modern "western marxists" (aka progressives, social democrats) believe that sectors of the economy should be unregulated unless there is a need to regulate. Naturally, they will believe that the sexual/romantic market should be unregulated unless you can outline a specific need for regulation. Finally, some feminists are sex-negative. It's n…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 12:13 PM
2

This isn't entirely true. It's easier for men to get into nursing school, in most cases. The emphasis on having diverse populations has definitely helped men in women dominated fields.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/15 10:41 AM
1

Actually, I was the origional person who listed them in that format.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 10:41 PM
1

They can be used interchangeably. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551450/social-status In most Western urban-industrial societies, such attributes as a respected occupation, the possession and consumption of material goods, physical appearance and dress, and etiquette and manners have become more important than lineage in determining one’s social status. Occupations in these societies tend to be graded along a continuum rather than in a rigid hierarchy. Status is closely correlated wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 09:09 PM
1

I may be broke as fuck (and therefore of low social class) but if I'm the king shit in this room full of other broke as fuck dudes, right now (perhaps because I've demonstrated mastery of a skill), I have high social status. You're thinking of interpersonal social popularity. Demonstrating some random skill does not elevate you within a social class. It may increase your dominance or popularity within the room, but it doesn't affect your occupation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 08:49 PM
1

In sociological terms, they are pretty much the same. Social status literally describes the social class a person belongs to based on their occupation. If you're a doctor, you have high social status. If you work at McDonalds, you have low social status. That's what I meant when I said "wealth/social-status." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_class_in_the_United_States#Social_status
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 08:31 PM
1

So what did you mean when you said this: If they had enough [wealth/social-status], they'd be alphas.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 08:07 PM
1

But I said, But don't "betas" have wealth/social-status? and you responded, If they had enough, they'd be alphas. So would this be accurate? If they had enough [wealth/social-status], they'd be alphas. How is wealth/social-status significantly different than money? In our society, social-status is determined primarily by your level of wealth. In the field of sociology, "social status" = social class. So I shortened, "wealth/social-status" to "money." I did not mischaracterize your point of view.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 05:46 PM
1

Where did this happen? Are you talking about the fact that I added [money] to your quote? That was to clarify the subject. We were talking about wealth/money at the time. It was needed for context.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 04:33 PM
1

No. That didn't ever happen. This is the comment in question: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/333emd/why_do_men_care_about_partner_count_so_much_more/cqixldo You said: If they had enough [money], they'd be alphas. I responded: I'm sorry but I think TRP (or maybe just you) is catastrophically wrong here. Being an alpha has little to do with wealth. Alphas are supposed to be the most sexually desirable mates, and studies show that wealth doesn't factor in to what a women consider…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 03:39 PM
1

I don't know I can have this conversation with you. You aren't even reading my comments. It's extremely difficult to have a conversation when only one person is listening. But you just said that men with high IQ have low testosterone. Yes, I did. Specifically, this is what I said: "Furthermore, studies have found that girls with high testosterone have higher IQ. Boys with high testosterone have average IQ. Boys with low testosterone either have very low IQ or very high IQ." Men with high IQ and …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 03:23 PM
1

And, after your second point, I say again, men decide after that discussion. Unless the women says she doesn't want to get married during that discussion. These days, getting married is almost always a group decision. You also have to go further back. It could be that both men and women simply aren't engaging in relationships that will lead to marriage. Perhaps women can't find suitable partners. I don't know. But regardless of the reasons, young people aren't getting married at the same rates a…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 01:50 AM
1

Two things. One, women can say no. Two, couples often talk about these things (marriage, kids) before the man asks.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 01:31 AM
1

Well, women aren't getting married, so clearly they are hesitating to get married. Seems like common sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/15 01:21 AM
1

What about the studies that show an increase in cognitive function as the result of the administration of testosterone to low-T patients. So? Men with low IQ have low testosterone. No. TRP does not agree with you at all. That was my point. I was disagreeing with TRP. Why did you insinuate that I don't understand TRP?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 10:45 PM
1

I think I understand why you don't like TRP. You have every.single.facet. of the ideology utterly wrong. Wait, so TRP agrees with me that wealth has nothing to do with being "alpha?" Then why did you claim otherwise? Despite the body of science that shows exogenous testosterone increases cognitive function in low-T patients you believe that high IQ men have low testosterone? Despite the fact that there's a dearth of women (of obvious low testosterone), you still think high IQ men have low testos…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 09:53 PM
1

Cuz, yea...that's just rationalization. They would if they could. I disagree. If they had enough, they'd be alphas. I'm sorry but I think TRP (or maybe just you) is catastrophically wrong here. Being an alpha has little to do with wealth. Alphas are supposed to be the most sexually desirable mates, and studies show that wealth doesn't factor in to what a women considers "sexy." Wealth is something that subset of women chase in the hopes of marrying a wealthy man. Also, the traits that make a man…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 09:28 PM
1

Yes. The fact that attractive men primarily hit on attractive women is the evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 09:02 PM
1

I disagree. They will still want the most attractive partner available to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:59 PM
1

In conclusion: alpha widowing is not just about sex for the woman. It as about the loss of what she (probably erronously) believes was her one chance at a bimodal maximiziation of her mating strategy. And instead...she has to settle for a guy who is just a provider. But this is based on the assumption that she wants a relationship with the "alpha." Most women choose not to marry those types of men, not because they cannot but because they're shitty candidates for marriage. If it was just about t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:58 PM
1

If you have a room filled with men and women, men are all going to want sex from the most attractive man in the room. Of course that women will want sex from the most attractive man in the room, but the other men will settle for less attractive women if they have to. Why? Because men have a higher sex drive than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:54 PM
1

Regardless, it's still to vague. The instinctual urge to seek out sexual partners that are as attractive as possible? No shit. That's what humans do. If you want to have this conversation, we need to talk about specific things that women are attracted to. That's how this all started.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:45 PM
1

Why is that definition more accurate than the definition from Red Pillers on /r/PurplePillDebate?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:33 PM
1

http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2k8zk0/terms_acronyms/ Perhaps the problem is that RPers can't agree on definitions. In our official terms and acronyms thread (link above), one RPer defined hypergamy as follows: Hypergamy as a red-pill concept is present in men and women both, and deeply ties into the concept of SMV. It means that given opportunity, men and women will generally want to trade up their partner for one with a higher SMV. But the difference is, what the sexes value…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:15 PM
1

Am I reading this wrong? http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2s1coz/what_is_an_alpha_widow_and_why_does_it_matter/ Once, she even was the plate for a guy who was 95th percentile. A real top dog. She didn't even make this guy wear a condom. He's handsome, in shape, wealthy, has a nice apartment and an expensive car, and a fat dick. He's sleeping with a lot of other girls at the same time. She doesn't care, because girls would rather be one of many in the harem of an alpha, than the one an…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:07 PM
1

Women go out and find a guy with a higher SMV than theirs. Men do not. Women plan around finding that guy. I disagree with this, though. That's not my understanding of what TRP means by hypergamy. I think your definition is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 08:03 PM
1

The concept of an alpha widow includes sex, but it isn't necessarily the kernel of the concept. Why is it more than sex? According to TRP, an alpha widow is a women that was formerly a plate to an desirable man. She was not romantically involved, she was just a plate. For her, it was all about sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 07:26 PM
4

You never heard the term "MAN UP" and calling men who don't settle down and marry "Man-children"? Are you THAT unaware? No? Man-children is a word used to describe 25 year old men that live in their parents basement and play video games all day. It has nothing to do with marriage. I have literally never heard of this. I'm not sure what you're getting at here, that's kind of the point. Women are status/resource hungry. Women are no more status/resource hungry than men. Women in the US buy more th…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 07:19 PM
3

Men are expected to MAN UP and settle down with women. That is the ULTIMATE gender role and one that men have destroyed with ease. Absolutely not. That is not a gender role. Men are expected to be the providers in marriage, but by no means is there social pressure to actually marry. No, the reason why even "STRONG INDEPENDENT WOMEN" WANT AND NEED men with jobs is because of hypergamy and their need for material goods/status. Then how did matriarchal societies in which women controlled the resour…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:35 PM
1

But why? How is an alpha widow fundamentally different from an alpha widower. Bold to add emphasis.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:32 PM
1

Hypergamy is wanting to have sex and marry partners more desirable than yourself. But men want this too. It appears that what you're saying essentially boils down to women have lower sex drives than men. It takes much more effort for a women to get turned on, so obviously it's going to be easier for more attractive men to turn her on. So men date down in an effort to achieve easier casual sex. But to clarify, it is all a result of the fact that women have lower sex drives, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:31 PM
0

Alpha widows is the concept that women have sex with 9s and 10s when they're younger, but their future husbands (7s) well never be able to compare. Well, men have sex with 9s and 10s when they're younger, but their future wives (7s) will never be able to compare. Same exact concept.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:25 PM
4

It's 2015 and STRONG INDEPENDENT WOMEN don't need men with jobs Except of course they do, because traditional gender roles still exist. Men are still expected to be providers. People are indoctrinated with this social institution at a young age, and they cannot shed it. That's what feminism is trying to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:23 PM
1

So hypergamy is wanting to have sex and marry desirable partners? Isn't that something all people do?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:17 PM
5

No, the availability of sex for men in their 30's forward is what's causing men to not be interested in marriage. That's exactly what I just said. Sex is available, because there's a portion of women in their 20s who are willing to engage in casual sexual encounters. It stands to reason that those women aren't interested in marriage, at the moment. They're certainly not actively pursuing marriage. Now explain to me why Men don't put the same weight of having a job for prospective wives. I do. It…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:15 PM
0

Yes A defining characteristic. Not The defining characteristic. Maybe you should read my comment, then: "A defing characteristic of "alphas" is that they're good for sex while "betas" are only good for commitment." I'm not saying the comparison works for everything, but it works here. The point is that men have different metrics for marriage and for sex. For marriage, men sacrifice some of the things that make an ideal sexual partner. Thus the marriage partner is not an ideal sexual partner. Thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:11 PM
5

Hardly a mystery So the availability of women who aren't interested in marriage (at least in their 20s) are causing men to not be interested in marriage. Isn't that exactly my point? Then why on earth is the most important trait in a marriage prospect a man with a job when she's STRONG AND INDEPENDENT? That sounds pretty fucking needy to me. Because women want men that are financially independent and attractive. These women are financially independent and attractive, and they want the same exact…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:04 PM
1

But BB is marrying up. Choosing a mate because of their ability to earn income in marrying up. I'm sorry, but you're going to need to give me a more concrete definition. I can't work with this level of ambiguity.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 06:00 PM
1

The act of doing those things, or the want. Important distinction.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 05:17 PM
4

Again, you're conflating men saying no first with women rejecting marriage. It ABSOLUTELY MATTERS who rejects first. And men are rejecting marriage beacuse...? A woman with no economic prospects will both want AND need a marriage. It's not a binary choice that's the opposite of each other. A women with economic prospects will want, but not need marriage. That's what I'm arguing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 05:12 PM
1

Maybe you should define it, then. That way I can use your own definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 05:05 PM
4

I feel like hard-line Red Pillers struggle to see the distinction between want andd need. Don't get me wrong, I think it makes sense from their point of view. After all, if you view all humans as instinctual machines, "want" and "need" become the same thing. Men don't want sex, they need sex. Women don't want "alphas," the need "alphas." It's their biological imperative and resistance is futile.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 04:59 PM
3

Except women aren't, that's the point. Yes they are. You, yourself, mentioned that women are saying "where have all the good men gone." There aren't enough good partners, so women are making the choice not to get married. Uh yes it does? A big part of marriage is economic. And it's BLUEPILLERS who make the argument (which you basically did and now you're doing a 180) that women don't need marriage because women are "STRONG AND INDEPENDENT". Why can you not seperate the words "want" and "need"? R…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 04:53 PM
1

I'm not sure what marriage has to do with dating. Hypergamy is the act of marrying above your own social status. I thought we were talking about dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 04:04 PM
4

Why are you arguing then Why are you arguing? All I said was "Both men and women are spurning marriage." It doesn't matter what people want. What matters is the decisions people are making. Both women and men are choosing not to get married. That's all I'm arguing. Women can choose not to get married because of financial freedom. Financial freedom has nothing to do with wanting marriage, it simply enables women to make the choice not to marry if they need to.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 04:01 PM
1

Listen, I disagree the Briffault's Law is an AWALT trait and many RPers actually agree. We can talk about another one, if you would like, but we're not going to talk about Briffault's Law.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 03:56 PM
2

Uh no, it's generally accepted by virtually everyone that it's women who want marriage more. I'm not disputing that, actually. "Women behaving badly" != women not wanting marriage Again, I'm not arguing this. why do these financially free women want marriage MORE than their prior counterparts, who were MORE shackled to a man with a job? I don't care, but it's not really relevant to my argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 03:54 PM
3

When i say 'behaving badly', i mean men are saying no to marriage/commitment FIRST. And why are men saying no to marriage "first"? Because women are "behaving badly," ie women are behaving in ways that make men think they don't have to or don't want to marry.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 03:29 PM
5

I don't think it matters either way. If we follow your logic, men are "behaving badly" because women are "behaving badly," so women are at fault. But why are women "behaving badly?" Because men are "behaving badly" and they don't have any other options. It's a chicken/egg scenario, but it's enabled by the fact that women have financial freedom.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 03:22 PM
10

Your study asks whether women want marriage, not whether women are choosing to marry or not. There's a difference. I would want a fucking castle because they're sweet, but even if the money I probably wouldn't buy/build one because they're hugely impractical and don't fit with my lifestyle. Keep in mind that this is what I said: Both men and women are spurning marriage. That doesn't mean they don't want an awesome marriage, it means that they're choosing not to get married. I don't proclaim to k…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 03:12 PM
4

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/opinion/schwartz-single-women/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/galtime/why-so-many-women-couldnt_b_3728308.html
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 03:04 PM
1

No. Briffault's Law specifically describes matriarchal Native American tribes. It cannot be used outside that context. All that's necessary for it is for women to be allowed to choose their partners. TRP doesn't even believe this. TRP argues that men are the "guardians of commitment." By that logic, where a man can derive no benefit from association with the woman, no such association takes place. The reality is that people (both men and women) decide to enter relationships. So a better law woul…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 02:54 PM
13

Marriage rates are plummeting. Men are the rational ones: They're playing the trump card they have: Their commitment (they're not giving it). And the overwhelming majority of them don't even know what TRP is. This is way to narrow a view. You assumed that men are the ones dictating the decline in marriages, but skepticism is increasing among young women at the same rate. Both men and women are spurning marriage. Women are financially independent, so it's no longer something they really need.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 02:06 PM
1

But that applies to men as well. Its literally APALT, all people are like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:31 PM
1

I'm confused. Briffault’s Law can only exist in matriarchy. Since our society isn't a matriarchy, it doesn't really apply. Briffault’s Law essentially describes matriarchal Native American tribes. In such tribes, a women and her brother controlled the house and the resources. The mother was the "captain," while the brother was the "first mate." Male suitors came from other tribes and were glorified sperm banks. Since women controlled the resources and the house, they could order the man to do wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:17 PM
1

Because all woman are hypergamous, despise weakness in men and follow britfaults law. Can I just say that I think these two things are kind of funny right next to each other? In short, they arguably contradict each other. Briffault’s Law essentially describes matriarchy, which Briffault believed was the natural state of many Native American tribes. Essentially, a women and her brother controlled the house and the resources. Male suitors were glorified sperm banks. Female hypergamy is a system of…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:10 PM
1

Wait, what? The sex can be simultaneously good for one party, and bad for the other. You've never had sex that was satisfactory for the women, but completely boring for you? Because that is what I'm talking about. If you're a married man and you have had many previous sexual partners, chances are, one of your previous sexual partners was better at sex than your wife. That's always going to be in the back of your mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:54 PM
1

Women are less judgmental and less likely to generalize or discriminate, especially when they're younger, according to psychological studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:51 PM
1

How many TRP men have been married? 10%? We've done surveys on PPD and most RPers were 22 to 30 years old. I doubt many had ever been married. People can be attracted when they get married, but fall out of attraction during their marriage. This is obviously quite common. I was initially specifically talking about people before they get married, not during marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:45 PM
0

Please keep it civil.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:04 PM
3

That was just an example. Why don't you give me an example of an AWALT trait, and I'll give you an example of an instance in which making that assumption would be harmful to your chances of attracting a women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 02:21 AM
2

I'm not sure why you'd think this. Because if one method requires assuming women are spoiled, and the other method requires assuming women are the opposite of sooiled, those methods conflict with each other. If you apply one of those methods to the wrong women, it will fail.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 02:14 AM
2

Actually, that's it's point of origin, as far as written text.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 02:11 AM
2

What do you mean? TRP doesn't go after a specific mindset. I've attracted women by using a completely different mindset. No it doesn't. It's possible that the same woman responds both to TRP method and also to other methods. Not if those methods are in direct conflict with eachother.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 02:06 AM
2

Because I've attracted women with completely a different mindset. It stands to reason that if a large number of women respond to methods other than those outlined in TRP, then a TRP understanding only works on a portion of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:59 AM
2

I think we're currently on the subject. The whole point of TRP is that by understanding the situation, you can respond better. That necessarily relies on AWALT because if NAWALT then that understanding's basically impossible. Yeah, you don't get it. I understood those social situations intuitively. There were only a portion of women on which TRP's type of thinking worked. Otherwise, it failed. If it works for you with every women you try (which I doubt very much), the the obvious explanation is …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:49 AM
1

Not all PUA. But can we get back to the subject? You know what I mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:28 AM
2

We outline the nature of women so that you'll know the situation better and be able to deduce the proper action from first principles. I would call that an analytical method and PUA. It's also nothing new. People have been doing it for thousands of years.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:19 AM
2

I'm talking about the PUA aspects of TRP. PUA is a term that applies to any analytic method designed to achieve some sexual goal with a women you've just recently met. Part of TRP is PUA.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:07 AM
5

I never said TRP doesn't work. I said AWALT doesn't apply, since PUA-like techniques only works for a portion of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 01:01 AM
1

Because I was what TRP would call "a natural" in high school. I had plenty of experience to learn from.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:52 AM
1

Did you not read the rest of the passage from wikipedia? The earlier, longer, and more complete passage comes from a moral tract known as On Marriage (c. 150 BC) by the stoic philosopher Antipater of Tarsus.[13][14] Antipater argues that marriage is the foundation of the state, and considers it to be based on divine (polytheistic) decree. Antipater uses misogunia to describe Euripides' usual writing—tēn misogunian en tō graphein (τὴν μισογυνίαν ἐν τῷ γράφειν "the misogyny in the writing").[14] H…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:46 AM
2

I've never tried TRP. I'm married. But my experience has lead me to different conclusions than your own. There's a fraction of women on which TRP (the PUA stuff) works, but it's about 10% of population. Dread game stuff works on 99% of the population, men included.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:44 AM
1

I disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:35 AM
5

Is it really functional though?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:08 AM
1

I don't think so. I know it was used as a pejorative term for homosexuals, but that was not its origin. http://www.ancient.eu/article/188/
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/15 12:06 AM
1

Compared to the women who don't find their husbands at all attractive? How common is this? Maybe .01% of marriages?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 11:54 PM
-1

It's not really intended to predict behavior. It just suggests that putting most of humanity into only two categories is going to yield large inaccuracies.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 10:51 PM
2

But the origin or he term comes from ancient Greece. It was used to describe a phenomenon, specifically the tendency of men who shared a love/hate relationship with their women. These men loved sex, but strongly distristed their women. This distrust of women drove their hatred. It's actually not the worst word to describe TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 10:45 PM
3

I'm not talking about trans women, I'm talking about the spectral nature of cis-women and cis-men, as well as the spectral nature of sexual preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 10:06 PM
1

I don't think it's changed recently in the US. For quite a while, socialogists in the US have been arguing that the concept of misogyny is not "hate," but fear or distrust. Fear or distrust drives the discrimination.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 09:56 PM
11

One of the inherent scientific problems with AWALT is it ignores the biological spectrum of gender, replacing it with a system where gender is binary. Sex is binary, but gender is not, and Gender is the relevent topic in this instance. Ultimately, this type of blunder makes TRP seem scientifically illiterate.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 09:40 PM
0

As of 2012? I'm pretty sure the definition hasn't change any time recently. hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women, or prejudice against women. It's essentially sexism against women. Should it mean something else?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 09:32 PM
1

If talking to yourself was significantly correlated with schizophrenia, you would have a point. The thing is, nearly all people talk to themselves occasionally. It's not a sign of poor mental health.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 08:58 PM
1

Does it matter? If it's correlated with mental illness, then it's a sign of poor mental health.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 08:24 PM
1

Extreme pessimism is correlated with several mental illnesses.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 08:10 PM
1

But less attractive. That's what matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 08:09 PM
1

So you don't think men sacrifice on looks when they consider women they want to marry? There's a mountain of evidence that says otherwise. Men settle for less attractive women in exchange for other desirable qualities like kindness, loyalty, ect. Men are willing to date less attractive women if they bring other things to the table.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 05:36 PM
2

Oh so we can't actually see the details, how convenient. Worthless You can put the data on an excel spreadsheet and do the analysis yourself. I thought I'd save you some time. It should be noted that the National Health and Social Life Survey in 1994 found that the risk was the same for both men and women. http://popcenter.uchicago.edu/data/nhsls.shtml
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 04:33 PM
2

Point to the relevant portions The relevant analysis is actually behind a pay-wall on another article, but it found that divorce rates for virgin males were 10% lower than they were for virgin females. Worthless Arbitrary. Worthless Arbitrary.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 04:16 PM
1

An alpha widow is someone who has had such incredible emotional rollercoaster moments that she compares every future man in her life to this idealised alpha that's always in the back of her mind. So every women that a man marries is the best in the sack that man has ever had? I seriously doubt it. Regardless, both men and women think longingly of former lovers. It's called the rosy retrospection bias. Even if the sex sucked, you're going to remember the best parts of that relationship and think …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 04:15 PM
1

No, and clearly I'm not the only one who thinks so. /u/0473332002285 agreed with the premise here: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/333emd/why_do_men_care_about_partner_count_so_much_more/cqhibhi Also, generally we remove/delete accusations of trolling. Either debate, or report stuff to the mods. Obviously, I'm a mod so I'm not trolling.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 03:54 PM
2

The overwhelming majority of studies back it up, what are you smoking: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/nsfg_2006_2010_puf.htm This survey found a correlation between divorce and premarital sex for women. The correlation was stronger for men than it was for women. http://journals.lww.com/aidsonline/Abstract/2000/10200/Links_between_premarital_sexual_behaviour_and.13.aspx "Results indicated no significant relationship between the experience of premarital sexual intercourse and marital satisfaction of…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 03:51 PM
0

"We further found that the more sexual partners a woman had had before marriage, the less happy she reported her marriage to be. This association was not statistically significant for men." Exactly. One study is not enough to eatablish this as fact, especially when there are arguably studies with conflicting results. Correlation and causation doesn't really matter from a practical matter for men. Men should avoid sluts for LTR's EITHER WAY. And women should avoid sluts for LTRs either way. If sl…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 03:33 PM
2

A defing characteristic of "alphas" is that they're good for sex while "betas" are only good for commitment. Why wouldn't you apply the same dynamic to women? Some women ("alphas") are ideal sexual partners while others ("betas") are better for commitment. If you marry a "beta" women, she won't have the same sexual skill that "alpha" women has. A man in that relationship will always long for sex with that "alpha" vagina. He's an alpha widower.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 03:24 PM
2

And? The downside risk is still much much higher for women. That's the important point. That's far from established. Women who have sex when they're very young are emotionally damaged. Or women who are emotionally damaged had sex really young.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 03:04 PM
-3

Of course there are male alpha widows. There are men who have had sex with "alpha" women.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 02:52 PM
1

"In our sample, only 23 percent of the individuals who got married over the course of the study had had sex solely with the person they married. That minority of men and women reported higher marital quality than those who had had sex with other partners prior to marriage. We further found that the more sexual partners a woman had had before marriage, the less happy she reported her marriage to be. This association was not statistically significant for men." Did you read that part? There are als…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 02:51 PM
0

Care to explain?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 02:21 PM
0

Why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 02:15 PM
-1

But all three are true for men as well, so I'm not sure it really answers OPs question.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 12:33 PM
2

I'm claiming that you don't know.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/15 01:49 AM
3

Actually, I'm claiming neither. I'm claiming that neither of us know the nature of women, with regards to this topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 07:58 PM
2

You are the one making the claim about the nature of women. The burden of proof lies with you. I'm not making any claims about women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 07:25 PM
3

You can't possibly run the experiment. It wouldn't be double blind. Too much bias, not enoguh objectivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 07:13 PM
2

Prove it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 06:51 PM
2

But I was saying that's a shitty way to portray women. It's not true, so obviously it's shitty.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 06:42 PM
2

"Women do not fall in lust in ways which make logical sense given what they verbalise as desiring" "Attractive pre-wall women are emotionally equivalent to teenagers"? Who ever said this was true?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 06:35 PM
3

I'm not sure how you phrase things like "Women want you to make decisions for them" or "Women want to be dominated in the bedroom" or "If you are not dominant in the relationship odds are your woman will find someone who will be, regardless of whether she leaves you or not" in an optimistic way, but I'm sure I simply haven't been paying attention. I'm not even talking about that kind of stuff. I'm talking about the "women are teenagers" and "women are not logical" stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 04:38 PM
3

But you cannot change his words. That's moving the goal posts.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 04:28 PM
2

Not one that I see any rational basis for, but nevertheless an opinion. Of course there's a rational basis. Ever heard of the optimism bias? People are objectively happier when they are optimistic and wrong than when they're pessimistic and correct, within reason obviously. People thrive when they are slightly optimistic, even if they get screwed over every once in a while. When people are overly pessimistic, they're prone to depression and other behavioral health issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 04:26 PM
3

OK, "all people are mildly shitty" is not realistic. "People are self-centered and predictable" That's not what he said. Stop twisting his words. "Shitty" is a value judgement. That he applied to all people.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 04:22 PM
3

You can put lipstick on a pig. If you want, you can give that pig a full face of makeup, but in the end it's still pig. To be honest, I don't even know why your arguing this point. The TRP intro specific talks about how you shouldn't be concerned with the PC police. It portrays those traits in negative ways to encourage men to stop putting women on the pedestal of doing no wrong, not because it thinks that women are awful people. Actions speak louder than words. The fact that TRP does portray wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 04:16 PM
3

"All people are shitty" is not realistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 04:06 PM
2

But that's not how TRP portrays women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 03:40 PM
5

So people are only mildly shitty? That's so much better.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 03:35 PM
3

Meaning detrimental to your life. "All people are shitty" is a pessimistic view of the world. That level of pessimism is bad for you, as it correlates with depression and a whole host of other brhavioral health problems. High pessimism is also associated with lower income and an inability to forge lasting social connections.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 03:21 PM
4

So all people are shitty, and you don't hate them because they just can't help it? That outlook on life is sure win you friends. /s
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 03:16 PM
6

Sounds like you loath and hate people, which is just as problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 03:00 PM
2

FYI, we generally remove low effort memes like this. You're free to respond again, obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 10:27 AM
2

90% of those images were essentially "treat women with respect," which is generally good advice. You should treat everyone with respect. That's the definition of being an adult.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 10:21 AM
5

It's actually kind of logical. They put TRP and niceguysTM in the same category because both TRP and niceguys show a lack of empathy and social awareness. They view both ideologies as two sides of the same coin.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 10:14 AM
2

Ok? I don't understand what you point is. I already agreed with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 09:49 AM
3

But the past led to the present. Things improved from their past state and that was obviously dependent on the past state itself. I totally agree. The video raised some great points, but I just wanted to highlight the historical fetishization aspect. There may have been aspects about the past that were conducive to improvement Often times, the thing that drove us towards advancement was desperation. The promise of a better life was immensely important. Now, I'm not sure that the promise of a bet…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/15 12:04 AM
9

What do you think. Apparently our public education system is terrible at teaching history. People in our society have a weird habit of fetishizing the past. The past sucked donkey balls. I'm happily a memeber of the present-master-race. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosy_retrospection
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 11:01 PM
2

/u/chasingstatues, we don't allow linking to your own posts (similar to the SRD rule) in /r/TheBluePill or other subs. Can you please remove your post in /r/TheBluePill? Failure to comply with this policy generally results in a ban. You can read more about our guidelines here.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 08:52 PM
1

Who is talking here? You or feminist theory? It's basic feminist theory. That's why the women's liberation movement teamed up with the men's liberation movement in the 70s. Both had common goals. It's a well-respected feminist blog, meant specifically to respond to critics of feminism, such as myself. Amusingly, your own source confirms my above statement. Sorry, but I think a encyclopedia article is a better source than a blog. In this case, we're talking about academic feminist theory, not som…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 06:53 PM
1

aeon That same Wikipedia article continues well into the 1900s.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 05:04 PM
1

Anthropological evidence suggests that most prehistoric hunter-gatherer societies were relatively egalitarian, and that patriarchal social structures did not develop until many years after the end of the Pleistocene era, following social and technological innovations such as agriculture and domestication. According to Robert M. Strozier, historical research has not yet found a specific "initiating event". Some scholars point to about six thousand years ago (4000 BCE), when the concept of fatherh…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:44 PM
3

The ability of my opponent to question himself is no issue I care about. Well it's important to us, and that's what matters. We make the rules, and you decide whether you want to take part under the given conditions. That's how reddit works.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:39 PM
0

You said it first. I called bullshit. That's not a claim. That's a negation. You now have to prove yourself. So then what's your opinion on the matter?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:25 PM
0

According to feminism, the main point of patriarchy is to oppress women for the explicit benefit of men. You don't understand feminist theory. Patriarchy reinforced male dominance over women, but it was not always to the benefit of men. "Feminist theory defines patriarchy as an unjust social system that enforces gender roles and is oppressive to both men and women." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy#Feminist_theory https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Qm7MAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA143#v=onepage&q&f=fal…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:24 PM
0

That's not science. That is editorial. It has no place in a debate. It has first person sources. The burden of proof is upon you. You made the initial claim. Not me. The burden on proof is upon anyone making a claim. Are you claiming that women did have access to bank accounts, loans, ect? If so, then you have a burden to prove your argument just as much as I have a burden to prove mine.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:16 PM
0

I cannot believe you think patriarchy is a thing. Of course patriarchy existed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:15 PM
4

Then some people shouldn't make promises to other people they can't keep. Did you read the rest of my post? I can quote it for you: That's why we really need to stop shoehorning one life-style over another. Some people thrive in monogamous life-time relationships. Some people don't. Some people need sex 7 days a week. Some people (including men) need it once a month. That's why I'm sick of communities like TRP. As much as they say "it's a toolbox," the reality is TRP pushes one ideology on every…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:13 PM
0

There's a book called The Fifties Mystique which describes the day to day life of women in the 1950s. It's very informative. Just curious, what is your evidence that most women did have access to bank accounts, loans, ect?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 04:11 PM
4

Do you even understand what "question what you believe" means? That's supposed to apply to everyone, RP, BP, moderates, neutral, everyone. It's been the motto since /u/purplepilldebate started the subreddit. It's the one thing that will never change. Our rules exist to enforce that motto. If you're not on board, then go start your own subreddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 03:55 PM
0

How the fuck am I censoring what you watch? I just pointed out that this group has homophobic leanings. If you don't want to give them money, use adblock.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 03:52 PM
1

Why would anyone want to punish men for patriarchy, regardless of background? Feminists did not blame patriarchy on men. According to feminism, patriarchy is oppressive to both women and men. Patriarchy is the social system which forced conscription on men (the draft), enforced rigid gender roles, took away responsibility from women only to heap responsibility on men, and denied men the ability to forge meaningful relationships with their children. Feminism seeks to correct those injustices. It …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 03:27 PM
4

And this magically does not happen by using your system? No, it doesn't, because we delete responses that don't conform to the guidelines. CMV post? Only responses that disagree with the OP are allowed. Other responses are removed. What's the point of a CMV thread where the top comment agrees with the OP? The motto of this subreddit is "Question what you believe." Every post and every comment should respect this philosophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 03:13 PM
4

If I fail and they present a good argument on my corpse it is kudos to them. Unless your argument gets upvoted and theirs gets downvoted to shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:48 PM
2

You're one of them. So am I. You care about yourself, don't you?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:16 PM
0

Why would you want to punish men for patriarchy? Patriarchy was an institution. It was not the fault of men or women. It was a living, breathing set of social norms passed down from generation to generation. It cannot be blamed on people.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:15 PM
5

Are we talking about attempting to acquire new members? Or are we talking about indoctrinating existing members. It does both, so I suppose it doesn't matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:13 PM
7

Agreed, but some people just aren't meant to be monogamous. That's why we really need to stop shoehorning one life-style over another. Some people thrive in monogamous life-time relationships. Some people don't. Some people need sex 7 days a week. Some people (including men) need it once a month. That's why I'm sick of communities like TRP. As much as they say "it's a toolbox," the reality is TRP pushes one ideology on everyone. There are slight variations of that ideology, but they all share co…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 01:54 PM
3

One person can crush the arguments of a thousand people so numbers mean nothing. It appears that your operating under the assumption that people are objective and open-minded. I would like to offer you the red pill. Once you take this pill, you will be transported to the real world, where most people are subjective, emotional, and close-minded.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 01:53 PM
2

I can make it a Question for Blue Pill, but that would limmit the discussion to reponses from Blue Pillers.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 12:59 PM
3

Well if opinions are contrasted with facts, the title is a fact about my subjective experience, since it doesn't try to generalise from that I'm not so sure it counts as my opinion for the purposes of modding. It doesn't matter. You're expressing a subjective opinion about TBP. That means it's either CMV or Question for BP. Is it too late to fix it by adding a question mark at the end? Do you want it to be a Question for BP post?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 12:43 PM
4

Any post that expresses an opinion regarding TBP or TRP without asking a question that targets RP or BP will be flaired CMV. Only neutral, uneditorialozed, and meta posts will be given discussion or science flair.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 12:14 PM
4

If they fall in circle jerking that just means that is the level of their argument. So wait, when BPers dominated this sub a year ago and everything was turning into a BP circlejerk, it was because their arguments were better? But now that threads turn into RP circlejerks, RP arguments are better? But BP and RP arguments have not changed at all in the last year. I'm inclined to believe that circlejerks occur when one side has more people than the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 11:46 AM
0

This reads like a CMV post, why should it be discussion?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 11:38 AM
2

Maybe you could link to an example.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 11:31 AM
0

You're wrong. Very few women could have bank accounts. It didn't become common practice to allow amy women to open an account until the 1970s. Women could not have credit caards, nor could they take out loans without co-signing with their husbands. They also couldn't start their own businesses. Women couldn't practice law until 1971. In France, married women legally couldn't work without their husband's consent until 1965.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 11:30 AM
4

Bad move making this into a cmv, now the only responses that can be top are Bp. Are leople reading the rules? The rule is as follows: responses to the OP in CMV theads need to challenge the view of the OP. It doesn't matter what you challenge. You can challenge the semantics of the post, for all I care. It doesn't matter what "pill" you are. RPers can disagree with RPers. If theres anything in the post you disgree with, you can respond and explain why you disagree. Only question for BP/RP posts …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 03:17 AM
1

Fair enough, but women could not have a bank account, a mortgage, or any kind of economic freedom. If your husband was abussive, tough shit. If you wanted to be financially independent, tough shit. Women were almost completely powerless. In that type of environment, I would rather stay a man and take my chances in Korea.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:20 AM
1

This is question for Blue Pill post. Your comment was removed because it did not adhere to the guidelines outlined in the sidebar.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:14 AM
1

This is question for Blue Pill post. Your comment was removed because it did not adhere to the guidelines outlined in the sidebar.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:10 AM
0

This is question for Blue Pill post. Your comment was removed because it did not adhere to the guidelines outlined in the sidebar.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/15 02:08 AM
1

I disagree. Women are disproportionately progressive while men are disproportionately conservative. Conservatism favors men. It favors a return to 1950's style families, in which men had much more freedom than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 11:59 PM
2

By the end, what struck me was the exteme gynocentricity ( ie pro-woman, ie anti-man) in which it presents and attempts to solve the problem under discussion. Like, what's in the best interests of men is just irrelevant, while women "out of solidarity with other women" must do an opec-like embargo on sex and this is somehow morally good because it benefits women? Clearly, within the scematic representation of the video, men's and women's interests are opposite (men want more and cheaper sex, wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 11:42 PM
1

I know you have your studies to prove this, and that's fine, but my experience is that reasonably attractive people (both sexes) have had much more. Around 15% of people in that age range have had sex with more than 15 people. I think you would be extremely surprised. My wife and I are both reasonably attractive and I had sex with 2 people before her, while she was a virgin before we met. There are plenty of people that just don't prioritize ONS and focus on other things in life.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 10:34 PM
1

The average US citizen age 22 to 44 has had sex with what, 5 people? It's not like people are out having sex with someone different every other week.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 09:34 PM
2

Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 08:45 PM
1

If it was a CMV post and you disagreed with the OP, you could respond. You just have to challenge some aspect (no matter how small) of the origional post.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 08:31 PM
2

The rule is, "Responses to CMV posts should challenge the OP."
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 08:30 PM
0

Yes. Just giving you a head up. An explanation of the PPD guidelines can be seen here
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 08:29 PM
2

Why is gender so special? Because in the monetary market, the goal is always to make money. Everyone ultimately wants the same thing. In the sexual market, we all want different things.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 05:33 PM
1

OK? I don't see how you contradicted my argument. I never said anything about unconscious vs conscious participation. The fact that people participate unconsciously is one of the things that makes the sexual marketplace so complicated.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 05:29 PM
4

And? It enhances the OP's argument and sheds new light. That is valuable. Then he can make his own post. This is a tightly moderated subreddit, much like /r/changemyview and /r/science. You knew that when you came here. If you don't like that style of moderation, no one is forcing you to stay.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 05:01 PM
3

The video was posted in PPD a few days ago. I don't really need to add anything to what was said in that thread. I just wanted to inform people who made the video.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:37 PM
4

If your argument can't withstand scrutiny, then maybe it doesn't deserve to be at the top. But a comment that agrees with the OP isn't an argument at all. We want actual arguments in top level comments. Your rules are basically, 'let me find a way to punish people's views i don't like', let's be honest here. But the rules are enforced both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:33 PM
4

I don't have time to argue with you. If you don't like the rules, take it to modmail.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:29 PM
5

Oh, i'm sorry, is there something preventing the opposite side from replying? Yes, voting. If people vote up responses that agree with the OP, then the actual responses that challenge the OP get relegated to the bottom. That's not how CMV threads are supposed to work.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:28 PM
4

No, it's not. It's pretty simple and objective, actually. We remove posts that don't conform to the guidelines. The guidelines are in the sidebar.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:25 PM
3

It doesn't matter. The opposite side deserves a chance to defend their viewpoint. That's how debate works. In a debate, you don't give one side 40 minutes to talk and one side 20 minutes to talk. You give both sides equal opportunity to defend their position.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:24 PM
3

Usefulness is subjective. Any unregulated discussion sub would merely become a circle-jerk for one side or the other. These rules can suck, but they exist to keep the sub balanced.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:22 PM
2

Since this video was posted a few days ago... Just wanted to say that the guy who runs the Austin Institute is homophobic. He previously published a widely debunked study that suggested homosexual parents are bad for kids. I'm not going to give this organization views on their youtube channel and I suggest that others do the same, (edit) or maybe use Ad-block or something. Maybe our society does need help with "family values," but it shouldn't come from people who publish misleading studies desi…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:19 PM
1

It's not my fault. People should read the subreddit's guidelines before commenting. We're going to enforce them regardless of whether people follow them or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:08 PM
2

Because it doesn't challenge the OP's view. This is a CMV thread. You have to look at the bigger picture. If we allow one exception, where does it stop? What metrics do we use to determine if a comment is worthy, despite the fact that the comment breaks the rules?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 04:06 PM
0

This rule is to prevent circlejerking. Without it, there would be no debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 03:26 PM
4

I removed your comment because this is a CMV thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 03:21 PM
-1

I removed your comment. This is a CMV thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 03:19 PM
2

lol, i never thought that 'perpetual teenagers' routine was real but now im intrigued. source? http://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-be5460184f1d06f414fc421764012519?convert_to_webp=true What perpetual teenagerrs routine? What does that have to do with height? Also, by your own logic, women should date men 6 years older, no? More like 3 or 4.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/15 11:45 AM
6

Why would men/women lie about the age of the men/women they're dating?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/15 11:59 PM
4

Because women want to date men of the same maturity?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/15 11:56 PM
3

One would think that, if hypergamy had zero effect, we'd see those two be equal. Not necessarily. Men and women mature (physically and mentally) at different rates. Women mature much faster than men. While women can be finished growing as early as 14, men can continue growing past 20. Presumably, fully developed men will be more desirable. For this reason, it's not unusual that younger women date older men. An average physically fit male is going to be more attractive at 22 or 24 than he will be…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/15 10:47 PM
1

It's not. /r/ChangeMyView has similar rules and people make it work. All you have to do is be aware of your responses to the original post.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/15 03:13 PM
1

If one of those conflicting comments gets too high, it will be deleted. So why would I even bother commenting? No, I don't think you understand the mechanics. Only first order responses/comments have to contradict the OP. Here's a link to show you what I mean: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/32ld7t/ladies_the_smarter_you_are_the_more_likely_you/cqcbxur The initial response from PetticoatRuled disagrees with the OP. The responses afterwards are unregulated. You can see that JP_W…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/15 02:52 PM
2

Like hyperrreal said, if your ppst and title were neutral and not editorialized, we could give it some other flair.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 10:25 PM
5

Its not a debate if only one side is allowed to comment on any given topic. Both sides are allowed to comment, however initial responses need to be from a certain point of view. If it's a "Question for Red Pill" thread, you wouldn't want Blue Pill strawman answers at the top of the discussion, would you? Of course not. Questions for Red Pillers should be answered by Red Pillers. Questions for Blue Pillers should be answered by Blue Pillers. After those initial responses, the threads are complete…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 07:37 PM
1

That's true, no one knows for sure who first said the expression, but it definitely is supposed to be sarcastic. In its original use, it was facetious.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 06:26 PM
2

No, fresh humor is not stale.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 06:25 PM
1

But "fresh" humor can be expected and I never said otherwise. Thrug was the individual that said it's only funny when it's unexpected. "Fresh" humor avoids the low hanging fruit.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 05:44 PM
0

Oscar Wilde frequently employed sarcasm in his works. The quote, "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit… but the highest form of intelligence," itself, was sarcastic. That's why using it seriously is ironic.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 05:42 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_and_working_memory The interaction between the amygdala, the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), and the superior temporal sulcus and gyrus (STG) enables one to process social information for personal interaction. In the case of autistic individuals there seems to be a limitation in these structures such that facial expressions, body language and speech expressions (ex. sarcasm) go consciously unnoticed. Furthermore, given that sarcasm requires second-order interpreta…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 04:38 PM
5

What are you talking about? These rules are designed to prevent circle-jerking. When RPers ask questions, they get BP answers. When BPers ask question, they get RP answers. When someone posts a CMV thread, the responses have to contradict the OP. That's the opposite of circlejerking.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 03:47 PM
1

And then your assurance that your belief is the norm, that some unnamed professionals agree with you, and a bit of implied shaming at the end. It's well known that the inability to understand sarcasm is associated with autism spectrum disorders, as well as several personality disorders. Sarcasm requires that the listener empathize with the speaker. If the listener is incapable of fully empathizing with the speaker, then the listener's reaction to sarcasm will range from confusion to hostility. T…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 03:45 PM
3

But he incorrectly used a common idiom. That's confusing, for some people.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 03:20 PM
7

Wait, what? There's no wit in sarcasm? Of course there is. You see sarcastic jokes all the time in comedy. Sure, there are also bad sarcastic jokes, but there are bad jokes of all kinds. And as I said previously, psychologists have found that sarcasm is a sophisticated style of humor. Those that struggle to find humor in sarcsasm generally lack social intelligence and empathy.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 02:53 PM
4

Isn't that true of all humor? It's not funny unless it's "fresh."
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 02:33 PM
2

But using "lowest form of wit" to criticize sarcasm is extremely ironic. It makes ther user sound like an idiot. I just can't take it seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 02:08 PM
5

That's ironic, I suppose. I also think it's a toothless criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 01:58 PM
8

Isn't that subjective? A lot of people like sarcasm.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 01:48 PM
-1

But "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit" is an idiom, and he used it incorectly. In fact, he used it in the opposite way it was intended. It's like using "I think, therefore I am" to suggest that none of us really exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 01:44 PM
3

What are you talking about? We have rules. Questions for Blue Pill posts only allow origional responses from BP folks. Question for Red Pill posts only allow initial responses from RP folks. People who ask questions of Blue Pillers don't want Red Pill answers and vice versa.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 01:39 PM
1

Ok. I was confused there for a second.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 01:35 PM
6

But the "lowest form of wit" remark specifically refers to the cutting nature of sarcasm. "Lowest," as in an insult. It has nothing to do with being "bad" or not funny. The quote is almost exclusively attributed to satirists such as Oscar Wilde, who frequently used sarcasm. The phrase, itself, is sarcastic and it was never intended to be a criticism of sarcasm on the grounds of a lack of sophistication. If anything, sarcasm is the one of the most socially sophisticated categories of humor. Psych…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 01:31 PM
4

From what I've read, TBP doesn't even exist for most TRP people. That's what I thought, but recently I have been seeing this "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit" stuff, which is ultimately criticizing TBP for the "biting"/mean nature humor. Isn't that the obvious intent of their humor?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 11:31 AM
1

TIL monday is the weekend.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 10:37 AM
9

There is little humour, and even that the lowest form: sarcasm. So your complaint is, "they're mean." I'm genuinely curious, does that actually bother people on TRP?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 10:33 AM
5

Are men capable of empathy for women?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 10:25 AM
2

This is a question for BP thread. I removed your comment. Please read the guidelines in the sidebar before posting.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 03:01 AM
1

This is a question for BP thread. I removed your comment. Please read the guidelines in the sidebar before posting.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/15 03:01 AM
2

PSA: No posting pictures in this thread, please. Read our guidelines in the sidebar before you comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/15 03:30 AM
2

But, biologically, male-female is a spectrum. If there we just two absolute genders, the secual market place qould be much simpler.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 07:00 PM
3

I'm not really trying to get at what values you hold or discerned in the video, but how BP receives the economic description of how the sexual marketplace works If there is a sexual market place, it's the most complicated marketplace in the history of humanity. It's so complicated, that I doubt it can accurately be described and I especially doubt that it can be accurately predicted. Economists cannot accurately predict our economic future, so I doubt that individuals without academic training c…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 04:34 PM
3

Then why is TRP always saying "you cannot judge a women by what she says" whenever a thread like "what do women like" comes up?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 03:59 PM
2

So you should judge women by what they say, not by what they do?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 02:21 PM
2

TRP always advocates judging indoviduals/groups based on actions rather than words. TRP's actions are quite clear. The actual subreddit fueled by anger and not much else. It's not about self improvement. /r/becomeaman is about self improvement. /r/fitness is about self improvement. /r/TheRedPill is about rants and field reports.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/15 12:35 AM
2

Please don't mention doxxing or doxxed users. Thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 11:35 PM
1

The actions will depend on the relationship and the man/woman involved. There is not a one size fits all formula. That's why communication is so inportant.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 11:33 PM
1

But communication can overcome embarrassment, so it is an effective tool for fixing relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 06:45 PM
0

Many women really don't understand what floats their own boat. Do you have some kind of source to back that up. People say this all the time on TRP, but I've never actually seen any concrete proof. In my experience, women are pretty good at describing what they like. They just always feel embarrassed or shamed to talk about that type of thing, since they're shamed from a very young age about their sexuality. My wife is no exception; she is not very good at, or eager to engage in, introspection. …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 06:11 PM
1

You misunderstood my question. Philosophically, what is "better" in the context of society?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 05:34 PM
1

well, If that's what is meant by "just communicate" then its a lot better than what I always have seen it portrayed as, but I have never seen that expressed as the goal of the mystical BP "just communicate" advice. Yeah, I hate to generalize, but in my experience women are much better at exrtapolating meaning from a phrase like that. For many women (as well as socially intelligent men), phrases like "be yourself" or "just communicate" are worth a thousand words. Be yourself = be confident. Know …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 03:49 PM
3

Communication allows you both to explore what attracts you. The communication, itself, isn't going to rekindle attraction. The actions you take after communication can rekindle attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 03:26 PM
9

The reason why the idea that "the burden of proof lies on the one making the claim" make no sense is that in a debate both sides usually make a certain claim. You don't understand burden of proof in the context of PPD. You assertion that both sides are making a claim is not always correct. Especially since the distincion between a "negative claim" and "positive claim" is dubious. For example, we could say that RPers' position is "women and men are different" which would be a positive claim, and …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 12:17 PM
2

I've done plenty of reasearch already. I've been a moderator here for a year. I know TRP like I know the back of my own hand. Nothing is going to change my opinion on these issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 12:00 PM
2

But my point wasn't that Africa is homogeneous. My point was that certain areas of Africa are as culturally homogenous as areas of China. Yet regions within China have very little tribal/cultural violence while regions wihin Africa do. Africa has a history of colonialism that specifically inflamed these cultural differences, which is exactly why there is so much cultural conflict. Singapore, on the other hand, is extremely ethnically diverse but has very little violence. Canada has two distinct …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 11:59 AM
1

What's "better"?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 01:05 AM
0

Sure, but I guess I was thinking about it from my perspective. 2.5 hours would be less than my current alotment.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/15 12:28 AM
0

Who said anythong about self improvement? It's just a metric for the minimum execise requirement.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 11:56 PM
0

This is WAY overstating it, but an easy way to see his argument would be to think 1930s Germany. The goal is to get rid of the jews, and you disagree that that is a good thing. Are you still ok calling the process of rounding them up in ghettos progress? Progress towards their goals, yes, but regress away from my goals.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 11:54 PM
0

Right, but within regions and racial groups, there's a tremendous amount of violence in Africa.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 11:53 PM
0

Or did they observe the type of men they actually slept with/dated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness Regarding long term relationships: "studies have concluded that men place a higher emphasis on physical attractiveness in a partner than women do." Short term: "studies have found little difference between men and women in terms of the weight they place on physical characteristics when they are choosing partners for short-term relationships, in particular with regard to their …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 10:33 PM
1

It was part of their discourse. It has been achieved. I disagree. Feminists are arguing all the time about the definition of equality. For instance, some feminists are against affirmative action. They disagree with the feminist principle that affirmative action is a fair policy to correct a societal imbalance. The new course is to remove all consequences from women, and maximize consequences on men. I doubt this is the case. Feminists actively fought to allow women to participate in combat. That…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 09:26 PM
0

Not according to the studies that have been conducted on the subject. Studies have found that sexual attraction for men and women primarily depends on physical appearance.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 09:23 PM
1

So? Feminists do seek to define and fight for equal rights, no? You may not agree with their definitions of equal rights, but that is part of the political discourse.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 09:20 PM
1

Feminism has always had the goal of political and social equality, as far as I know. That's what wikipedia says. Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 09:12 PM
0

Good health, to minimize the risk of heart disease and diabetes, per the CDC's recommendations.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 09:11 PM
0

They're the single biggest factor, but they're not everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 09:09 PM
1

I disagree that tribes were as competitive as you make them sound. Tribes were essentially tightly knit families. There wasn't much room for dispute.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 09:08 PM
0

So you agree with the direction of society?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 08:08 PM
1

provided provision to a small number of women But what do you mean by providing a provision? Human hunter-gather tribes were communal and shared all resources. The men did not have access to resources that the women did not. All the resources were shared equally.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 08:01 PM
1

Not as frequently as men who distributed their seed freely That's what I just said, isn't it? If both men and women are freely sleeping around, then both of them will likely have offspring.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:52 PM
2

their defined goal is "not this." I disagree. The goal of feminism is political and social equality of opportunity or equal rights/opportunities for women. The LGBT activism is equal rights for the LGBT community.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:50 PM
1

But the "less is better" approach to hair is found throughout the United States I disagree. A decent number of women prefer men with chest hair. http://www.reddit.com/r/AskWomen/comments/1g6uzb/ladies_have_you_ever_wished_your_man_had_more/ http://www.reddit.com/r/AskWomen/comments/1bultw/what_are_your_thoughts_on_chest_hair/c9a754d
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:48 PM
3

The direction doesn't seem to matter so long as it's different from the starting point. Of course the direction matters. "SJWs" have defined goals. Progress towards those goals is progress.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:45 PM
1

or preferred loose women would simply have failed to pass on their genetics as frequently as a man who ensured that the child he was raising was his Not if the men, themselves, were loose. If they were sleeping with multiple women, chances are he would conceive a child with at least a few.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:41 PM
0

GriddRexx did not take part in the study, as far as I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:39 PM
0

You already did. You said that we are progressing towards a thing that is not good. Thus you disagree with the direction of society.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:39 PM
1

In Los Angeles, police recently made the biggest organized crime bust ever. Why didn't you hear about it? Because they busted Mexican gangs that were ethnically cleansing blacks from their neighborhoods. That doesn't fit with any narrative. But that can come down to culture, not race. Wanting to live among those who share your culture is not racist. Look at the Implicit Association Test Which one? The poll I'm looking at is from MTV research, and found that roughly 90% of white millennial believ…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:07 PM
2

Then why do I see so many more guys at the gym, at the park, on the slopes, in the mountains, or anywhere active that isn't a yoga studio? I just don't get it... I don't know. Maybe women are going to different gyms, different parks, or different places in general. But statistics are statistics. There's a reason anecdotal data isn't used in science. And the one thing I've learned about women is that there is no such thing as too little hair (except on top of a man's head). A lot of guys I know h…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 07:00 PM
1

Right, but if the questions asked of both men and women are very specific, then you can compare their answers. That's the basis for psychology of gender differences.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 06:57 PM
0

The only real thing you can go by on a dating site is physical appearance, and maybe "shared interests." It wasn't a real dating site. It was a simulated experience which described personality traits, income, jobs, and had pictures. Of course there are intangibles, but they're no different for women than they are for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 06:45 PM
1

I know a lot more guys who work out more regularly than women But I just posted statistics that show otherwise. Your experience isn't as accurate as statistics. My manscaping routine involved trimming my legs/arms/armpits/ears/nose/eyebrows, trimming or (preferably, waxing) my chest (no shave - stubble comes back too quickly), waxing/shaving my back, shaving my pubic hair/balls/ass, and probably a few more things I have forgotten. Followed up with generous amounts of lotion. It was not an easy o…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 06:43 PM
9

raised on mainstream propaganda Mainstream propaganda like James Bond, in which an attractive man has sex with attractive women? The idea that women are attracted to attractive men is pretty mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 06:31 PM
1

How? Slavery was actually very poor solution to the problem of needing manual labor. The blacks would've had a much higher economic output if they were working for themselves. Because we had an animal instinct of xenophobia and racism. We naturally distrust those of us that are different. By abolishing slavery, we overcame this animal instinct. Disagree. Xenophobia is built into us. Everywhere you see different races living together, you have conflict. It's inescapable. The most peaceful societi…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 06:28 PM
2

It still makes sense if different goals are in direct conflict with each other. True. Progress is 100% dependent on your goal. If two people have opposing goals, then one persons progress is another persons regress. But my point was that "progress in negative" is technically regress. It's merely a semantic difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 06:00 PM
0

But that's because you disagree with the goal, not because we are not taking positive steps towards that goal. You don't disagree with the progress of the journey, you disagree with the destination.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:58 PM
0

This is a CMV thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:55 PM
1

For males, there is a MUUUUCCCCHHHH higher bar set for where work in the gym equates to a significantly improved attractiveness. Men's bodies are more built for labor/fighting so this makes sense, but this also means that the kind of male bodies you see in Hollywood take a lot more effort (and for Hollywood in particular - steroids) and a lot more time than jogging and putting on makeup. The type of women you see in hollywood have similar fitness routines. Most of them spend at least an hour a d…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:54 PM
2

I think reality does a pretty good job backing up the Individualists. I can point to countless examples that conflict with individualism. The abolition of slavery is a great example. The US civil rights movement is another. Apartheid, gay rights, feminism. There are countless examples of society overcoming animal instincts. These efforts are rarely 100% successful, but 100% success is never the goal. I think you missed the mark here: believe that we really can transcend our animal selves Collect…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:52 PM
0

Progress generally means positive movement towards a goal. Maybe you're thinking of a different word? Or perhaps it's the goal you disagree with, not progress or lack thereof. To clarify, when society moves in a negative direction, it would be regress, not progress.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:42 PM
1

This is a question for blue pill thread. I removed your comment. Please read our guidelines before posting.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:06 PM
1

This is a question for blue pill thread. I removed your comment. Please read our guidelines before posting.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:06 PM
15

Blue pill men don't believe women are shallow enough that it's important. This is a strawman argument. Pretty much every "blue piller" in this thread is talking about how much looks matter to women. I don't know how you could miss it. Since middle school, the attractive girls dating the attractive boys.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 05:03 PM
0

You have to count gym time/active lifestyle time (something that women do, also, but men certainly do more). I did count gym time for both sexes. Most men don't workout. 77% of men don't get the required amount of exercise each week (2.5 hours of light cardio, or 1.25 hours of intense training). 82% of women don't get the required amount of exercise, so it appears the difference is pretty small. Manscaping (which is a requirement, at least when I was actively trying to get laid) takes fucking fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 04:50 PM
0

Of course there are other factors, but pure sexual attraction is most governed by looks. Virtually every study ever conducted on the subject has found the same thing. The wikipedia on physical attractiveness has some good sources. When considering long term relationships, some studies have concluded that men place a higher emphasis on physical attractiveness in a partner than women do. On the other hand, some studies have found little difference between men and women in terms of the weight they …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 04:34 PM
2

If only there were a guide or resource for them to improve. Like /r/fitness, or any of the other fitness forums and websites. I agree. There are plenty of resources available.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 04:30 PM
3

But you claimed this: Women are drawn to dangerous and violent types The paper you linked defined "good genes" as a symmetrical face. "In humans, symmetry is a hypothesized indicator of good genes, symmetry is associated with male sexual attractiveness, and more symmetrical men tend toward a short-term reproductive strategy ." It simply asked women if they were attracted to other men. It did not define or attempt to define what women find attractive beyond physical features. The premise of the p…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 03:39 PM
0

Haselton/Gangestad paper. Link? Do the math. No. Correlation is not causation. Even if the correlation exists, to say that women are genetically drawn to certain types of men requires genetic evidence. Unless you have that genetic evidence, you cannot claim it's genetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 02:46 PM
6

How much time does the average women spend every day trying to look good? An hour? How much time does the average man spend every day trying to look good? 10 minutes? Surely that's at least part of the answer. Men in our society are under the impression that women don't care about looks, for some reason. Of course women care about looks. As far as pure sexual attraction, looks are absolutely the most important thing a man can have. Furthermore, looks (for both men and women) are about 50% geneti…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 01:53 PM
2

Actually. I'm a dude. I'm married. I know you haven't because I KNOW men don't want to date sluts if they have the choice. And why do you assume this is biological?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 12:53 PM
1

What if I've done the research and found he opposite?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 12:33 PM
-1

This is a CMV post. I removed your comment for violating our guidelines.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 12:22 PM
0

This was. CMV post. I removed your comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 12:18 PM
1

Dislike for sluts is biologically ingrained. Imagine a world before contraception and protection. The sluts would have been a combination of disease ridden whores (with no antibiotics to cure the disease if you caught it off her) I seriously doubt it. The STDs of modern times probably don't resemble the STDs of the pre-agricultural era. STDs became so common because humans were living in large cities and mingling with all sorts of people. Before cities existed, tribes could prevent STDs by only …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 12:14 PM
1

This was a CMV post. Your comment was removed.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 11:47 AM
3

Right, and men claim to have around 6 partners, so the real answer is likely somewhere in between. We'll call it 5. Seems like a pretty minir difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 11:43 AM
1

I remove many of your comments for circlejerking. That's one strike for you, /u/Prodigy2throw, and /u/Will_Im_Not
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/15 11:37 AM
3

This was a CMV thread. I didn't see you challenge Grid's view so I removed your comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/15 11:29 PM
1

No, I edited to correct my comment. I don't really care how I look. Besides, who fucking sets traps on reddit? Seriously? What a weird-ass creepy thing to do. Whatever, do you want to talk about the subject or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/15 09:43 AM
1

Read my edit.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/15 09:27 AM
2

But that falls under the umbrella of civil rights issues. The supreme court has made a number of rulings that suspend a business' right to discriminate against minorities.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/15 08:58 AM
1

But women did not rate themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/15 08:55 AM
10

Sexual orientation (as well as gender) is defined during gestation and early childhood. Both are likely controlled largely by our epigenome. As our brain develops, it is exposed to different levels of hormones which semi-permanently turn on or off certain genes. Because of the nature of this process, sexual orientation as well as gender is not binary. Rather, both are a spectrum. The prenatal levels of testosterone, among other hormones, determine to what extent someone is gay/straight and gende…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/15 01:20 AM
0

Regardless, those quotes don't say anything about "open forums." I really wouldn't read too much into them. Reddit is a private for-profit internet forum like any other internet forum.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/15 06:30 PM
1

Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/15 06:27 PM
1

This is a question for blue pill thread. Your comment was removed.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/15 06:21 PM
2

Well it was the first thing I saw on the about reddit page Look again. It won't be there. They have a series of 20 or so quotes that they cycle through. Every time you refresh the page, it changes. You don't think they, at the very least, picked those quotes out? I'm sure they did. But still, those are not the words of reddit. It's how users describe reddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/15 06:19 PM
1

It's in big bold letters on the about page. That's actually a quote from a user. If you refresh the page, the quote changes. It's supposed to be like a review. It in no way reflects the views of Reddit Inc.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/15 06:11 PM
4

The thing is places like Reddit (and Facebook and Twitter) are quasi-public forums and thus the First Amendment must apply to them if we are to uphold any modicum of free speech. But then you would be infringing on the free speech of Reddit Inc by telling them what they can/cannot allow on their privately owned servers. Reddit Inc has the same right to free speech as any individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/15 06:08 PM
1

In all honesty, how can it be in good faith or civil when this is literally a debate group involving a cult of misogynists? If that had been your argument, it would have been fine. You took it too far when you claimed that they're "all fedoras," uggly, ect. It sounds like a troll to me. Realistically, you have no idea what they look like, so it seems irrelevent. If you reword your post to focus on more relevant details, we won't touch it. Also, you asked for pwrsonal information (pics) which is …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/15 02:32 PM
1

No? Where did I say that?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/15 11:44 AM
15

If you're actually interested in this subject, you should read some of Miranda Fricker's work. She's a British Epistemologist (philosophy of knowledge), and she wrote a book entitle Epistemic Injustice. Specifically, she coins the term "Testimonial Injustice," which is essentially occurs when an individual's stereotypes cause them to devalue the knowledge or opinion of another individual. An example would be when a man subconsciously discredits a women's opinion on baseball. After all, she's a w…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/15 12:33 AM
6

I've heard that most instagram models make money via product placement. I've heard you can get tens of thousands of dollars for every 100,000 subscribers. Some of these girls have 1 million subscribers, so they're probably making several hundred thousand dollars just from advertising.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 06:29 PM
1

They're just as few and far between as oversized female models. But isn't this exactly the point? This was one (should be) normal sized model. Just one among dozens of extremely fit models. That has nothing to do with fat acceptance.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 06:19 PM
0

If you don't, then why speak as if your personal preference or experience is a fact common to everyone or most people? I was saying that you cannot assume that someone's fantasies are actually something they want. Fantasy is fantasy. Reality is reality. You cannot conflate the two.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 05:38 PM
0

I just assumed you were female going by your responses. Lol, what? You assumed I was a women because I didn't want a threesome? Really? Why wouldnt you like a threesome then? Why? It just doesn't sound interesting or fun. It also sounds like a logistical nightmare. There's no way I could devote enough attention to both women to make the experience equitable and enjoyable for all. And are you seriously suggesting that you not wanting to have a threesome with 2 women to be common to men in general…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 05:31 PM
1

No, you see male models in the single digit body fat range. Abs start to appear at 10% BF. "Average" for a male? 15%-18%. So even the males are an ideal. Abbs start to appear at 14-15% body fat. According to this website, that's in the same range ("fitness") as the plus size model we're discussing. But ultimately, you can find male models without absolutely chiseled abs. There's nothing wrong with showing images of men without abs.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 05:23 PM
0

If you get turned on by lesbian porn, it means you have to be somewhat bi-sexual. Wait, what? Why does being attracted to women make me bi-sexual? Doesn't that make me heterosexual?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 05:19 PM
0

The subject of the conversation was fantasy versus reality. What excites us in our fantasies differs from the things we enjoy in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 04:51 PM
0

But you didn't say mainstream porn at first anyway, you said "porn". Well I'm sorry, I meant mainstream porn. Not all mainstream porn is "not enjoyable sex" either. But most of it is. We're talking about averages here, not outliers.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 04:27 PM
1

If she's really 24%, she falls into the "healthy" category, but its a world apart from "fit" or any of the categories supermodels fall into. So what? What's wrong with having healthy models in a magazine? You see male models and celebrities that fall into the healthy category all the time. Do you see how moving the ideal that a model is supposed to exemplify into the realm of the (what should be) normal is counterproductive to combatting the current obesity epidemic in the west? No. I don't at a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 04:25 PM
1

This (sfw) is the women we're talking about, right? Would you call her fat? She's not as fit as she could be, but she's far from overweight.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 04:06 PM
1

What the fuck are you talking about? You can go to pornhub and look at the 100 most watched videos over the course of the year. That's mainstream porn. Of those videos, how many show realistic sex or sex where a women orgasms? A handful at most. Ergo, mainstream porn is not realistic nor enjoyable sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 04:03 PM
1

OK? Well regardless, will you concede that Robyn Lawley is not fat or anything close to it? She has body fat percentage in the 24% range. That just isn't fat. That's not even overweight.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 04:01 PM
2

OK? I didn't say anything about Marilyn Monroe. Marilyn Monroe was fucking tinny, obviously. And I know about vanity sizing. My wife has a 24 inch waist, which makes her a 00 in modern times. In 1955, she would have been a size 12. I get it, vanity size sucks and it makes shopping harder for thin women. But we're talking about Robyn Lawley (bikini pic), right? She was the "plus size" model on SI this year. She's 6'2 and 163 pounds, which gives her a BMI of 21. Inidividuals are not considered ove…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 03:47 PM
2

How objective can this sub really be? All the mods appear to be neutral/blue pill. Can't see a single mod with a red pill flair. Alphabetmod, ppd_FrameEnforcer, and hyperrreal are all RP. I've had some of my comments yoinked almost immediately before for being minimally insulting (actually called out a troll for comparing red pillers to the cosmos and autists - mods let that ridiculous thread stay up, too.) On another occasion however some blue pill chick comes in on a full frontal assault (comm…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 03:23 PM
3

Fat acceptance is now in the SI swimsuit issue. I don't know about that. The women in the SI swimsuit issue was 6'2 and a size 12. That's hardly plus size and barely "fat." At that size, fat acceptance isn't crazy. The crazy shit comes from the women that are obese. /r/niceguys is a subreddit that links to stuff off reddit like TiA. /r/TheBluePill is to /r/TheRedPill in the same way that /r/niceguys is to the vast quantity of loners writing articles and facebook comments about how women are too …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 03:15 PM
2

There is such a thing as average mainstream porn. Do you honestly think that average mainstream porn is a realistic portrayal of sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 02:52 PM
4

I disagree. Look at all the shit that gets posted over at /r/niceguys.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 02:32 PM
3

You claimed that uggly women don't want to be passed over. I'm saying that uggly men don't want to passed over. it has nothing to do with TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 02:31 PM
6

A lot of the dudes on slut hate would be happy with a slightly above average chick or even an average girl. They are incels so of course they fantasize about the hottest since its unattainable for them but that's because they've lost all hope and don't care anymore. But an average girl is out of their league. It doesn't really change anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 02:11 PM
1

How often does a women orgasm during porn? Once in 1000 times? I think it's fair to say that porn sex sucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 01:57 PM
2

This is a question for BP thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 12:56 PM
2

Except that study literally indicated that women were messaging men that they rated less attractive than themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 12:52 PM
3

You have to be kidding, right? Ever heard of sluthate? Google it There are swarms of young unattractive men that want to date models, but cannot. They just complain all day about how shallow women are. It's much more prevelent than TRP or even PUA.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 12:49 PM
1

Have you ever actually had sex? It's nothing like porn. If it was like porn, it would suck.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/15 12:30 PM
2

How is that any indication of what they actually like? It's porn, for fucks sake. Who actually wants to do what they see in porn? EDIT: I have a feeling that you're going to miss my point so let me clarify. What arouses me in porn is no indication of what I like in real life. Porn is fantasy, not reality. I may get turned on by some lesbian stuff, but I'd never actually want a threesome.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/15 11:04 PM
4

I disagree. I've found that women know exactly what they want. I think the OP is right. Men don't ask the right questions. When a man asks for "dating advice," a women is going to tell him how to get commitment (LTR or marriage) from women that already like him. After all, that's what dating is all about. If you want sex advice, then you need to ask for it specifically. You also have to realize that a women probably isn't going to help you unless she thinks your heart is in the right place. If s…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/15 09:34 PM
0

This is a question for BP thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/15 06:04 PM
7

Waist to hip ratio is a genetic thing. Facial structure is a genetic thing. Bust size is a genetic thing. So what? Men seek out genes to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/15 05:55 PM
1

Tone it down a bit, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/15 01:22 PM
1

I'm sorry, but I would need to see the specific post.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 10:42 PM
1

This is a question for BP thread, so I removed your comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 09:53 PM
5

CMV is "challenge my view," at least here. It always has been since we added that flair.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 08:06 PM
4

Presumably my comment was considered circle-jerky. I think it's in the gray area (it said, "god forbid you take charge and tell her what to do"), but I certainly would have rewritten it to remove the sarcasm if a mod had let me know. Now that I do know, I can certainly tone down my own sarcasm - that's not a problem. But you as a mod didn't tell me that. I just happened to notice it. It was luck. I didn't remove your comment. When I remove comments, I try to let people know. Also, as to the issu…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 08:04 PM
16

Honestly, circlejerking is always a problem with the more populous group. When BPers dominated this sub, BP circlejerking was all over the place. Now, with a RP-leaning audience, RP circlejerking dominates. So it naturally follows that most of the bans have resulted from RP circlejerking. When it comes to tendencies regarding mod actions, BP and RP are identical. You're all a lot more alike than you think. Seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 07:33 PM
0

I removed your comment. This is a question for BP thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 06:44 PM
1

Holy shit, people. This is a question for BP thread. BP responses only. Please read the rules before posting. Thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 06:43 PM
4

This. Men and women and even individuals within gender-group react differently to different hormones. A small amount of testosterone could have a massive effect on the average women, while it will have little to no effect on the average man. While we can research hormones when we look at large groups of people, it's difficult to compare one individual to another.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 06:39 PM
2

This is CMV post. Unless I missed something, you didn't challenge the OPs view.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 05:51 PM
-2

already skewed downwards for the men by female raters It wouldn't matter, since the y-axis is a percentage.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 05:48 PM
3

OP, if you include the link to the study in your post, that would be awesome. http://bleske-rechek.com/April%20Website%20Files/Bleske-Rechek%20et%20al.%202012%20Benefit%20or%20Burden.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 05:46 PM
0

Men are more likely to message women out of their league because Fair enough. The assessments of attraction are still useful though, and still mildly support that women have less realistic standards of physical beauty of men than men do of women. Definitely. But they also highlight how rough the bottom third of women really have it. A common MRA theme is how the bottom of the barrel men have it really bad. I think that the bottom of the barrel people (men and women) have it really bad. Many men …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 04:09 PM
4

I dodge the question because it's not possible to answer with the given data. I'm not even sure the question is possible to answer with all the data in the world. First of all, as far as sexual attraction, women are not more forgiving than men. Only when LTRs are on the table do women forgive attraction more than men. Why? I don't know. I would say that we're so far away from truthfully answering that question that there's no point in even asking until we have more knowledge. We don't even know …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:59 PM
-2

Not necessarily. This data has nothing to do with responses. It's merely examining initial messages. We have no way to conclude which people actually end up with dates. The data is extremely limited, and the possible conclusions are thus limited as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:53 PM
0

Given the above, I don't think it's fair to say that: "The data again suggests that men are more likely to message women that are "out of their league." But that's exactly what the data suggests. On the other hand, the data does not suggest that men are only willing to date women out of their league. Maybe that's what you meant? The data really only reveals the proportion of men/women getting messages. It reveals nothing about relative totals, nor does it reveal who men/women end up dating. That…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:51 PM
1

I think it would be silly to dismiss the data offhand though, as it seems to intuitively represent the real life experience of female choosiness But in this case, the men sending the messages are slightly more choosy than the women sending the messages.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:46 PM
3

Answering the question of "why" is always harder and more ambitious than answering the question of "what." There isn't enough data in this study to answer the question of "why." That wasn't really the intent of this post. Often times, I see the RP claim that these days, most women are only interested in the top men. This study illustrates that the reverse is also true. Most men are only interested in the top women. Both men and women have incredibly high standards. That was why I posted this.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:23 PM
2

Because men are judged on more levels than physical attractiveness, it is rare to see an 8+/10 that fulfils all female desires. Your reads of body language, your social intuition, humor, social proof, wealth, taste, hobbies, gate, confidence, self esteem, are all on trial at the same time when a woman gives you the sniff test. I think the study shows the opposite. The most attractive men are still getting the most messages by far. The 1/3 most attractive men are getting 1/2 of the messages.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:11 PM
2

The data is not incomplete. The point of the study is to look at just one variable. Obviously, there are other variables but they aren't the subject of the study.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:06 PM
2

I think it still is relevant. Proportions matter, not just totals.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 03:05 PM
3

Fair enough. The point of the study was to compare the messaging habits of men and women. I feel like without a reference point, the messaging habits of just one gender lose meaning. I mean, sure, you can argue this: If she has nothing special and is just a quite shy girl without any distinctive markers nearly nobody will message her because she is neither worth a shot nor all mine. But the same thing applies to men, yet those boring men are still getting messages from women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 02:25 PM
2

It could, but the data doesn't directly support that argument. There really isn't enough data to make a conclusion about other factors. I mentioned this in the OP: OK cupid study disclaimer: There are limitations to this study. For one, this is OKcupid. The sample is mostly young single people who have resorted to online dating. Secondly, this data only measures looks. That said, I'd like to discuss this data as it is, rather spending time pointing out the limitations. I think we're all aware of…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 02:22 PM
5

But this completely ignores the fact that the bottom third of men are still getting more than 1/6th of the total messages, while the bottom third of women are barely getting any. For all intents and purposes, it appears that being an uggly women is far worse than being an uggly man.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 02:05 PM
15

I wanted to post this, because a common complaint of TRP is that modern women have unrealistic expectations. This data, although limited, suggests that both men and women have unrealistic expectations. 1/2 of women may want to date the 1/3 of men that are most attractive, but 2/3s of men want to date the 1/3 of women that are most attractive. In both cases, "average" men and women lose out. The dating market is heavily tilted in favor of the most attractive third of men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 01:46 PM
1

Here's fascinating study designed by Dan Batson that shows people making a selfish choice, then rationalizing it away to the point of believing their own rationalizations. Ok, if we we asking people to explain their behavior, that would be one thing. We're asking them about height of their ideal mate. We're not asking them to rationalize this choice. It's not a complicated question. Surveys are used in psychology all the time. As long as the survey is well designed, it can produce useful data. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 12:08 PM
2

Why can't surveys be part of the scientific method? Many studies rely on surveys. I've literally never heard the argument that surveys are completely unreliable.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 02:43 AM
2

And I'm claiming it to be unreliable data. Surveys produce reliable data. It's not data used for scientific purposes, but it's still reliable data.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 02:15 AM
3

I never said it was scientific. I said that based on surveys, men claim they like women that are taller than average.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 02:07 AM
0

That's actually a good sample size. The range of answers was about 12 inches. A sample size of 2000 gives you 99% accuracy with a margin of error of roughly +/- 0.35 inches.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/15 01:20 AM
0

This is one: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/07/11/ideal-height-56-woman-511-man/
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 11:04 PM
-3

It's true that shorter women get married more often, but based on self reports, men have found taller women more attractive in most surveys (some of which have been posted on PPD previously). It's always good to remember that the things we find attractive and the things that make good life partners sometimes differ.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 10:39 PM
2

women want more of a gap than possibly exist on average. And so do men. If men prefer women that are 5'6, then they prefer women that are 2 inches taller than average. It appears that both genders prefer tall mates.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 09:48 PM
6

The average female height in the US is 5'4. It should be noted that the ideal female height, according to the average man, is 5'6, which means that men prefer women that are taller than average.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 09:45 PM
5

Is paternity leave the solution to finding equality? Perhaps. Is it common in the United States? No. Should it be? Absolutely. I'm a huge paternity leave supporter. I feel like this is an issue feminists could get behind, and you might get agreement between MRAs and feminists.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 09:37 PM
0

Are you talking about dread game? Because that's not exclusive to TRP or even men. I never said it was. Don't think about power like political power, but rather, personal and inter-personal power. It's there, all the time. As soon as you need someone, even if it's a little bit, more than they need you, they have power over you and, directly or indirectly, consciously or unconsciously, you may start wanting to balance it out. OK, and the term "power struggle" implies that two parties are fighting…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 07:11 PM
0

And when I say manipulation, I talk how a child starts to cry to get attention from their parents. That's manipulation for me, not the sort that has a very negative connotation (exploiting weaknesses, etc.) But that's not the type of manipulation I'm talking about. TRP uses psychological manipulation. Many people, in this same sub, will talk about how nice and equal their relationship is ignoring the subtle, but present, power struggle. A power struggle implies that people want power. I don't wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 05:03 PM
0

In my opinion, a lot of anti-TRP talks very negatively about power, control and manipulation, which are, in my opinion, very human things. Is this not a naturalistic fallacy? Just because a behavior is "human" or "natural," it doesn't mean a behavior is good. It could be argued that slavery and racism are natural human behaviors, but that doesn't mean we cannot try to eliminate or minimize those behaviors. For me manipulation is anything we do to change how others view us...and we do this consta…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 03:30 PM
3

If you go the BP route and marry a strong independent high income career women you almost certainly will end up in a higher tax bracket assuming you yourself also make bank True, although marriage makes it easier to get a loan and buy a home, in which case you'll be paying a whole lot of interest which gets deducted from your taxable income. It really depends on the situation. The tax code is too complicated to simplify down to a place where you can say "marriage results in lower/higher taxes."
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/15 12:13 AM
2

FFS. Reporting is a cowardly act unless it's something extreme, which this clearly isn't. Not all all. We want people to report anything that violates our guidelines. It's not cowardly at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 11:07 PM
8

Can people stop reporting every post? The report button isn't the "I disagree" button. This is a CMV post. If you disagree with the OP, challenge his view. OP, I thoroughly disagree with you. You're view of the future is way too extreme. If reduced reproduction rates become a problem, governments will partially subsidize the costs of raising children. Singapore is a model for this concept. In Singapore, you can essentially get paid tens of thousands of dollars a year just for raising children. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 09:57 PM
-1

Yeah, we need a TL;DR
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 09:11 PM
5

But alimony gender neutral. The only reason a woman might take half of your money is because she makes significantly less that you. Besides, alimony is only involved in 15% of divorce cases. Child support rarely actually pays for the cost of raising a child. Realistically, divorce is not any more financially cataclysmic for the average man than it is for the average woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 08:34 PM
14

I was going to say the same the. I get the sense that of the men that turn to TRP, many of them want control. In the relationship department, they've been out of control much of their lives. Their desire for some stability is perfectly rational and very understandable. TRP gives them the ability to control/manipulate women. I think the criticism of TRP stems from the fact that TRP takes control away from women. You end up in a flipped situation, where the man has more control and the women has v…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 07:58 PM
1

No you don't. Cross cultural trends can suggest that something is universal, but they are not proof. Pretty much every agricultural society on earth became parriarchal, so it's not surprising that elements of that system still exist across nearly all cultures.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 02:13 PM
1

Legally, yes, but they remained a socially conservative society. Women ultimately had few oportunities for advancement beyond a certain point. They could become engineers, but they would never run a plant. They could become doctors, but they would rarely become a specialist.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 05:55 AM
2

Why would other cultures differ? Most large cultures have encouraged women to take on certain roles in society. Many of the cultures you mentioned are more socially conservative than the US, not less socially conservative.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/15 05:42 AM
1

There's a subreddit for it. /r/mensliberation I think it says a lot that MRA is popular while more progressive men's lib is not. Most MRAs see them selves as adversaries to feminists. They don't necessarily want progress in many instances. Some of the things they want are regressive and reactionary.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 11:38 PM
0

It's not a big deal. The guidelines are in the sidebar. (4) Responses to Ask BP/RP threads should be appropriate. Primary response in Ask BP threads should be from BPers. Primary responses in Ask RP thread should be from RPers. (5) Responses to CMV posts should challenge the OP. I leave your comment up for now since it appears you're new, but next time your comment will be removed unless you challenge one of the OPs assertions.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 11:27 PM
2

Maybe I missed it, but where did you disagree with the OP?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 11:20 PM
1

MRA? Called Women haters and discredited. What about men's liberation? It's a pro-feminist men's issues movement, but it has practically no supporters.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 11:10 PM
1

I don't know, but I think that usage is common with midwest and northern racism. In the South, any racists will say that all black people are "niggers." The racists that live in the midwest and the north will more commonly use the definition from the urban dictionary link. At least, that's my experience. I live in the midwest, so I'm more familiar with the urban dictionary definition. That was the basis for my comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 07:15 PM
1

Wait, would you call the guy who wrote this definition, racist? http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Niggers+v.s.+Black+people I would, but he's saying that not all black people are "niggers." That's exactly my point. Racist people will say that line, "not all black people are niggers," all the time. I've heard people say "Obama isn't a nigger because he's successful." It seems like the same concept.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 06:45 PM
-1

But before we move on, I'd like you to either agree or disagree with the notion that because we understand what one another means over there, we can use status/behavior interchangeably (still incorrect, but understandable). I don't think you understand each-other very often, to be honest. It seems like RP is very inconsistent and hypocritical in some areas. To make things worse, I think very few RPers actually understand TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 05:15 PM
1

Nigger =/= Cum dumpster in any way shape or form. If I had implied that, you might have a point. I'm comparing the link between nigger/racism and the link between cum-dumpster/sexism. The analogy is not nigger to cum-dumpster. The analogy is "people who say nigger are racist" in the same way that "people who say cum-dumpster are sexist." Calling someone a cum dumpster is nigger is not racist, it's a description. You can't call every black guy a nigger because not all black guys are niggers. On t…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 05:11 PM
3

Are these particular situations not incredibly disrespectful to actual victims of date rape/any rape in general? Maybe this would make a good thread, but this was a CMV post and you did not disagree with the OP in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 01:44 PM
0

Are we talking about christians or the red pill. Most christians in the US are terrible christians. Many of them are the opposite of what they claim to be. I would say the same thing about TRP. This is going to sound horribly patronizing, but I don't think most RPers (at least the regular contibutors) have a good sense of reality. To use your analogy, physicists are experts in their field so you can trust that they know their shit. Furthermore, physics has agreed upon principles that have been p…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 01:37 PM
1

Reddit's favorite criticism! I'm going to take that as you didn't understand, so I'll explain clearly. Analogies are supposed to make a concept easier to understand. When you use a shit analogy, you make the concept harder to understand. When everyone understands the underlying concepts and the difference between two concepts, those people can use the wrong words and still be understood, and still know that everyone in their circle continues to understand the difference between the concepts. I a…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 01:16 PM
2

No, I made an anology. Cum-dumpster is a sexist word, and people who use it are generally sexist. Nigger is a racist word, and people who use it are generally racist. The use of particularly hateful words that target a group are often associated wih general hatred for that group.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 01:12 PM
0

I think you used a terrible analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 01:01 PM
2

Does calling a black guy a nigger mean you hate most black people? 9 times of of 10, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 12:57 PM
0

Not when you talk about physics amoung peers.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 12:54 PM
7

Bpers are not strictly wrong about this. Rpers themselves often conflate alpha status and alpha behaviour. I was going to say the same thing. From an outside perspective, the actual regulars on /r/TheRedPill are not always the best being what they claim to be. It's kind of like how the most outspoken christians often partake in the least "christian" behavior, focusing their energy on political issues such as gay marriage and abortion rather than helping the poor and the needy.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/15 12:34 PM
1

I think making fun of someone for a deficiency isn't acceptable behavior, but the same thing applies to everything and everyone. TRP has no right to criticize people for shaming when they shame groups of people all the time. While mocking people generally isn't OK, internally judging men as "creeps" is perfectly fine. It's an assessment of social intelligence. It's not different than judging someone as smart/dumb, attractive/unattractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/15 03:00 PM
1

You have never faked an orgasm? Really? I probably have a few times. When your penis is inside a vagina, she can't see whether ejaculate comes out.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/15 06:24 PM
0

OP, I marked this post question for BP, since it isn't really a link to a scientific article. Is that OK? The alternative is CMV flair. It's up to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/15 06:21 PM
1

Because everything has a singular starting point. It either starts from a conscious decision or an unconscious reaction to something. But what if our instincts are the result of previous experiences? Instincts are not necessarily genetic. They are gut reactions. The source of that reaction is unknown. Instincts can change over our lifetime. They are fluid, not binding. We can also choose or learn to ignore our instincts, or even eliminate them completely.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/15 03:02 AM
4

So your bad judgement call was based on your belief in your own conspiracy theory. Um, no. AFC said they were working together. I'm still struggling to understand how you guys, in the context of discussing banning a person for doxxing, thought posting a third party's private chat log would ever, could ever, be the correct response. This shouldn't have been a difficult decision, particularly for mods of a sub that encourages debate between factions that have a doxxing issue. And frankly, knowing …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/15 02:34 AM
2

We censored the mentioned user out of the post. We were under the impression that they were working with AFC.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/15 01:44 AM
-1

Why can't it be a little bit of both?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 11:42 PM
0

Also, a man can be attractive but still come across as creepy. Elliot Rodgers looked kind of cute, but after watching his videos he came across as creepy as hell. Personality has a lot to do with creepiness. True, but my post was discussing a specific situation, a situation in which a man sent flirty messages. A crazy reactionary stalker is going to be creepy regardless, obviously. It's probably your attitude, not your appearance. In many cases, but we all have physical standards. Most of us, re…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:40 PM
1

Creep shaming is a mechanism for preserving her ego. All malicious teasing exists to stroke the teasers ego. That's...pretty damn obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:35 PM
-1

This sub can't have it both ways. We are either ruled by our instincts or we aren't. Everything that happens is a direct result of the decisions we make. Or it's a little bit of both.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:34 PM
2

Maybe you should instead of repeating tripe. Why? Isn't TRP all about amorality? Truth cannot be moral or immoral. Only actions and thoughts can be moral or immoral. I think many of us already understand why women shame men with 'creeper' nonsense. Why bring up social ineptness at all? It was already implied. It was implied that looks are the reason women were prejudiced. I disagree. I think "creep" is a word used to describe men with low social intelligence. Actually, I think they're very dupli…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:33 PM
1

well atleast you agree that it is prejudice, that's the most important part Choosing a women based purely on looks is also prejudice. We're all use prejudice. I think it's good to minimize prejudice, but there are always limitations. but your point only stands if we are accepting the premise that creep shaming only happens in a situation where a man is trying to hit on a women, which I don't agree with. But why? Some men are more socially intelligent than women. Thus it's only reasonable to beli…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:29 PM
-1

If by "higher social intelligence" you mean "overly complicate things so they always have something to bitch about to their friends," then yes. You are absolutely correct. "Social intelligence is the capacity to effectively negotiate complex social relationships and environments." (wikipedia). I'm always amazed at the shear amount of effort women put into pissing each other off, trying to get friends to turn on each other and wallowing in general misery caused by it all. Without the steady hand …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:25 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness For both men and women, there appear to be universal criteria of attractiveness both within and across cultures and ethnic groups. When considering long term relationships, some studies have concluded that men place a higher emphasis on physical attractiveness in a partner than women do. On the other hand, some studies have found little difference between men and women in terms of the weight they place on physical characteristics when they are…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:22 PM
0

Why? Of course we have instincts. The ability to judge intelligence, social or otherwise, is an important part of survival. That said, instincts are complicated. It's not really a topic you can accurately discuss in a few sentences.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:51 PM
2

I disagree with everything you said. I think people that are similarly attractive will generally be receptive to each other, regardless of age.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:45 PM
1

My post was intended as an explanation, not a commentary on morality or ethics.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:43 PM
1

Then maybe I should rephrase the post. Also, what qualifies as flirty varies. Obviously, different women like different kinds of men and different kinds of approaches to flirting.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:43 PM
0

I disagree. In my experience, it is a social convention. still a fact that physically unattractive men can date attractive women, and it's not a social faux pas for either to do so. This is actually really rare. For the most part, people date within their age range and social circles.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:41 PM
1

but I don't think they're creep-shamed to anywhere near the same extent as guys. Well, there are studies that suggest women in our society have higher social intelligence than men. Perhaps the average woman has a better ability to avoid situations where they violate social norms.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:39 PM
2

So I guess making fun of retards is ok too now if they were to come up to you and start talking. Making fun of people generally isn't OK, in most cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:36 PM
2

Well, I look at it this way. Most women will talk so much about how they need to get to know a guy first, how they like to take it slow, how they want romantic dinners and beach walks, how they would never have sex on the first date etc. You cannot assume that this is universally true. Different strokes for different folks. If a man approaches one of these women, be it online or in person, and starts right off the bat with flirty/sexual messages, he is attempting to bypass or take a shortcut fro…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:35 PM
1

However, there are still men who piggyback off the completely reasonable idea that socially awkward people shouldn't be attacked for their social awkwardness to excuse their own very deliberate sleaziness, much in the same way that some women who cheat on their partners try to use the reasonable reaction against slut-shaming as a was to shield themselves from consternation. I admit that this is probably true. There certainly are men that should know better. At the same time, there are men with a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:33 PM
1

Well, it depends. If you're on a dating website, then you're probably receptive to varying degrees of flirty messages.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:30 PM
1

I'm never said social norms are always good.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:28 PM
5

You miss the point. You are essentially shaming men for daring to break social norms. First of all, I'm not shaming men for breaking social norms. I'm explaining my interpretation of why men get mocked for breaking social norms. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. Additionally, you seem to think that women are capable of correctly determining their own smv. They probably could if they really try, but most of them live in a bubble of self-delusion. Every single one of them thinks they're a prince…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:27 PM
-1

I do not agree that makes me worthless or that I should be shamed such deficiency especially as a young man growing up. No, you shouldn't be. People may react strongly, but they should also have compassion. Calling someone a creep is shitty, regardless of the circumstances. women try to rationalize their prejudice as something else instead of being honest with themselves. the word creep is dishonest in this context because they are implying that your behavior is innapropriate instead of admittin…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:22 PM
0

Creeping is the breaking of social norms, without the proof you have the value to do so. But the attractive man in the scenario from the OP never breaks social norms. Sending flirty messages to an equally attractive woman on a dating site is not a violation of social norms. After all, she's there to meet men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:18 PM
1

So unattractive men should just know their place. Just get straight to the back of the bus right? There are things you can do to make yourself more attractive. I think there are limits, but it's just part of life. Life isn't always fair. Someone with an IQ of 80 probably isn't going to become a doctor. That's just the world we live in.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 08:16 PM
-3

I also feel that social skills and confidence play a part in what women find attractive (obvious right?) so consider this, growing up as a young man you wouldn't know you are ugly until you asked a few girls out and got rejected right? No. Part of social awareness is knowing roughly how attractive you are. If you don't know how attractive you are, you lack social awareness. I knew how attractive I was when I started talking to girls. It's not exactly rocket science. Do I look at all like the guy…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 07:16 PM
2

I disagree. Looks are 60 to 80% for both men and women. Maybe men are a bit higher, but both genders are looks-oriented first and foremost. I also don't see anyone denying this.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 06:41 PM
1

PDF ok? https://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/_media/pdf/key_issues/gender_research.pdf http://www.nwlc.org/resource/explaining-wage-gap A study by labor economists Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn found that when you look at the combined effects of occupation, industry, work experience, union status, race and educational attainment, 41 percent of the wage gap remains unexplained.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 06:36 PM
2

It won't happen again, not trying to encourage circlejerking. No problem. Thanks for understanding.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 04:51 PM
0

Yeah, it was a reactive move. We might put the link back in the sidebar at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 04:50 PM
3

One of the users you mentioned in your comment has asked to be removed from the conversation. If you edit your comment, I can reinstate it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 04:46 PM
2

The Breakfast Club then? Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 04:33 PM
8

People get banned from internet communities all the time. Let's not start getting into the habit of shining a spotlight on the troublemakers, nom saiyan? People do get banned from internet communities all the time, but they rarely cyberstalk the people they blame for their bans for weeks/months after their ban. If AFC had dropped this after the admins reinstated his account, we wouldn't be here. Instead, he's wasting his time giving me ideas for my user flair. He's also harassing non mods such a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 04:28 PM
4

OK, so basically the mods decide flair. The current guideline is, "The mods will add link flair to your posts. If you'd like to change your post's link flair, message the mods." Any post that has an editorialized title, text, ect, or has a clear RP/BP opinion is going to get tagged question for Blue Pill, question for Red Pill, or challenge my view. This may seem a bit harsh, but it's really the only way to prevent circle-jerking. Subconsciously, most people don't want their views challenged. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 04:08 PM
2

We don't want to censor your message. We've banned all things AFC. We won't engage him anymore. We're done. I don't care about PR and I certainly don't care what AFC has to say.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 03:20 PM
1

Yes, but we don't link to it anymore for obvious reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 02:28 PM
4

I couldn't beleive the conversation he had with you in /r/thebluepill. If he harasses you there in the future, don't be afraid to message the mods.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 02:26 PM
1

But it is a mystry. There are suggested explanations, but nothing concrete.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 01:02 PM
4

There's a 5-7% wage gap that is unexplained. I'm not sure what you're talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 11:23 AM
9

This is what the chat logs showed. The person who runs the IRC is a third party. When this first went down, I asked HHL and AFC for their version of events. I also aquired the chat logs. The chat logs matched up with HHL's story and made AFC look pretty bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 11:15 AM
8

We're not asking for constructive criticism. I'm just explaining our side of the story. SC can always message us in modmail. If SC agreed to the conditions I described in our modmail conversation, I would happily lift the ban. AFC is someone I won't interact with. I, along with mods of a few other subreddits and forums, am convinced he has borderline personality disorder. I'm simply not interested in whatever it is he has to say.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 10:25 AM
-5

Yeah, but being "baboozled" doesn't cause any physical harm. I would say a child's health should be more of a priority. If you want to pick a reason that will resonate wih most people, a child's health is the ticket. That's a life or death thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 12:07 AM
4

A voluntary paternity test would hurt a relationship Why? You can say that genetic testing is for the health of the child. Knowing the father of a child is important for the diagnosis of genetic diseases.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/15 09:19 PM
9

Something I haven't seen mentioned is the child's health. In terms of genetic disease and patient history, I think it's beneficial for child to know 100% who the father is. It's really something all parents should be doing. There's really no reason to be against paternity tests. That said, paternity testing shouldn't be government mandated. It provides no benefit to society at large.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/15 09:07 PM
3

So, I added CMV flair to this post since it asserts a clear opinion. Of course that means responses will have to disagree with you post in some way. I'm not sure you'll get the answers you wanted. Would you mind changing you question to, "do you agree with my analysis" or something like that? My problem is this: if I make it a discussion post, you'll only get RP answers. A RP post asking a RP question getting RP answers is more the realm of /r/AskTRP than PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/15 07:05 PM
5

Do you have some talking points? Something you would like to discuss?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/15 01:23 AM
2

Just to give you a heads up, this thread is tagged "question for blue pill." Primary responses should be from blue pillers, only.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 08:35 PM
0

Does anyone really think if you took any person and put them on an island for their entire life that they would go through it doubting that they were in the wrong body? If they were with other people, then yes I think it's likely you would have trans people at some point. It should be noted that gender fluidity exists independently in several different cultures. And indeed our knowledge of prenatal epegentic interactions suggests that gender dysphoria could be inherent to the individual and unch…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 07:17 PM
-2

That person is leaning on the "we can never know" premise to dismiss the idea that the biological outweighs the cultural in regards to gender identity/differences. And why is that not a valid defense. Objectively, I would say we cannot know anything for sure until we can link certain behaviors to certain genes and understand how the mixture of genetics, epigenetics, and hormones influence brain structure and function. Maybe this is an area you could have explored with a more directed question. A…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 07:01 PM
1

I also think the transgender as well as the let your child choose his gender movement is mostly rubbish. I suggest you read about gender dysphoria. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_identity_disorder Evidence suggests that people who identify with a gender different from the one they were assigned at birth may do so not just due to psychological or behavioral causes, but also biological ones related to their genetics, the makeup of their brains, or prenatal exposure to hormones. The current th…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 06:29 PM
0

I posted two links to previous threads here: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/309aci/what_does_everyone_make_of_this_documentary_the/cpqgxn7
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 06:18 PM
1

Does anyone contest the points the film makes? I've never seen a rebuttal to it. Here's two of our previous threads. I don't think it would have been crazy for me to ask you to read at least one of these before posting a new thread. http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2suxbd/have_you_seen_hjernevask/ http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1vx8am/norwegian_documentary/
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 06:17 PM
2

It has nothing to do with censorship and everything to do with the fact that there are already threads to discuss this topic. I was hoping the OP could ask something new, something we haven't already discussed.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 05:26 PM
2

OP, this has been posted to the sub at least a dozen times. I can't think of a reason we need another thread for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/15 04:59 PM
1

I added CMV flair to your post.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/15 10:47 PM
5

FYI, we have had to remove a number of your comments. Threads labeled "question for blue pill" require blue pill top level responses.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/15 02:44 PM
0

you don't get that until they're well into the strategy. they say "it's only this", then come back and go for a little more. why are you demanding proof for every instance instead of recognizing an effective strategy? Yeah, this is a slippery slope fallacy. "In logic and critical thinking, a slippery slope is a logical device, but it is usually known under its fallacious form, in which a person asserts that some event must inevitably follow from another without any rational argument or demonstra…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 11:11 PM
0

slippery slope is a strategy: simple example is seat belt laws. they were optional, then required, then they added click it tickets, but only as a secondary thing, now they're primary. Yeah, but you have to have evidence that the strategy exists. Where are the people saying they want to change the constitution to omit rape charges from reasonable doubt requirements? right, so sidestep it with 'civil punishments' where it isn't criminal, but we've determined that we need to track you for the safe…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 10:50 PM
1

no it isn't. it's 'process'. really, you're lawyering, while I'm arguing that you have the right to something akin to the legal protections you enjoy in real life - knowing the charges, counsel, cross examination, etc. But why? That system would be extremely costly for the college. Education is expensive enough as is. it's either that or the college should be barred from mentioning anything about why you left. Why does it matter? If someone interprets findings based on preponderance of the evide…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 10:47 PM
1

You have a right to due process, but not in the way you mean. Since college is not a right, colleges can set their own policies and have their own due process. By definition, whatever policy the college employs is due process. If they want to use preponderance of the evidence to make disciplinary decisions, then they can. When you agree to go to school at that university, you consent to their policy on discipline.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 09:04 PM
2

So many problems with this. Slippery slope fallacy. There's no evidence that anyone who matters seriously wants to make it the "legal standard." Making it the "legal standard" would be nearly unconstitutional. You cannot be convicted of a crime unless you are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Every major crime carries with it this standard of evidence. It's been this way in the US since the late 1700s. Any state law that sought to reduce the standard of evidence would be ruled unconstitut…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 09:01 PM
0

students have their due process Constitutional rights recognized. Due process is a term that refers to the protection of individual rights. People don't have a right to go to college. Think of colleges like clubs. They can have their own policies and rescind membership at any time. Anything to back all this up. It seems you're mounting more and more speculation on this. It's opinion, not speculation. A ridiculous amount of people take plea bargains when they shouldn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 05:00 PM
2

So you don't think male college students should have an equal chance under the law? I think being kicked out of college is not the same as being found guilty of a crime. It's essentially a civil issue, not a criminal one. And you base this on what? Well it's a complicated issue and race comes into play. Overall, the issues are racial or related to justice system, not rape-specific. In other words, our judicial system is racist and our judicial system also pressures defendents into plea bargains.…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 01:45 PM
15

I was going to say the same thing. A lot of MRAs got all angry about California's new rape law, but it only applied to campus discipline. In criminal court, the defense still has "beyond a reasonable doubt" protection in all 50 states. Being wrongly convicted of rape is extremely difficult and rare. There could be a larger problem with rape accusations, but it isn't the same as criminal prosecution.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/15 02:36 AM
2

Also, I almost guarantee that income won't matter for sex partner choice. There are already comprehensive studies on the topic, and they have all found that women don't care about a mans income when it comes to sex. Women primarily care about looks. You may say "well I see attractive women go home with rich guys all the time." Well, if this trend is even true, perhaps those women are hoping for more than sex? There are many other potential explanations as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/15 04:09 PM
5

So 4 photos at the same time? I'm assuming the uglier twin with high income has to be noticeably higher than the attractive one with high income? No. To successfully and accurately test the variables, the ugly twin and the attractive twins have to have the same incomes. Your thinking too much about desired results and not enough about method. Forget results. Think of this like an equation. You could test several different combinations. Let's say you have Uggly Twin 1 and 2 (UT1 and UT2). You als…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/15 04:03 PM
7

Then subjectivity comes into play? One person might choose the brunette over the blonde, not because of the financial margin but personal physical preference. The questions are mute, their has to be a downside to more money with the least amount of subjectivity at play, I.E. an actual identical women with nothing but makeup and styling. Then you have to go back to the drawing board. /u/Archwinger is correct, you can't test two variables at the same time. This study would be too "broad" and unsci…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/15 03:25 PM
1

What's your point then?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 06:17 PM
1

The purpose of all things Red Pill is to have men be more successful in the area of sex (including love and relationships, if the men so desire). In theory. However I like to take the "look at what they do, not what they claim" approach. Red Pillers are really bad at understanding and evaluating themselves, in my experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 06:15 PM
1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cogito_ergo_sum#Criticisms There have been a number of criticisms of the argument. One concerns the nature of the step from "I am thinking" to "I exist." The contention is that this is a syllogistic inference, for it appears to require the extra premise: "Whatever has the property of thinking, exists", a premise Descartes did not justify. In fact, he conceded that there would indeed be an extra premise needed, but denied that the cogito is a syllogism." The objection…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 04:43 PM
-1

That's not true. I mean, it is. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18557663 Prevalence of lifetime NPD was 6.2%, with rates greater for men (7.7%) than for women (4.8%). NPI NPI is not NPD. I was talking about NPD. "Narcissistic Personality Inventory, the most widely used instrument designed to assess sub-clinical narcissism"
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 03:25 PM
1

Sure it does. I know that I exist because my existence proves itself. There is no other possible explanation for it. I could be a brain in a jar or this whole world could be a dream, but either way, I exist. The rest of the world may not, but I do. You could be a computer program and you wouldn't know it. You think you have physical form, but you may not. It was the "hypothesis", I purposefully made it wrong and corrected it right below. Please read what I post if you are going to debate with me…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 03:16 PM
-1

I can't take you seriously, so I'm going to stop responding.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:57 PM
1

But if that one facet makes their personalities and behaviour manifest completely differently then your point is pointless. It's relevant, because changing just one aspect of their personality makes them "alphas." What about reactionary behaviour vs causative behaviour in alphas. That's another difference that isn't social skills. I disagree. That's a difference in social skills. They don't have the social means to be causative, so they are reactionary.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:56 PM
1

...Because women aren't the vast majority consumers of make up and clothing/accessories. What does that have to do with narcissism? Narcissistic personality disorder is measurable. Men are twice as likely to have it. It has nothing to do with make-up and clothing. I'd ask for proof, women are vastly more medicated than men now. Anti-social disorders aren't treatable. How can you not know that? Women are medicated for things like OCD and depression. A stereotype, you should know better. Across cu…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:51 PM
0

Not mine or your decision, is it? We're talking about the world we want, not the world we live in. If our interests align then yes I take the sociopath, if not, no. I disagree. You have to think about the interests of the collective in addition to the interests of the individual. The golden rule is treat others how you want to be treated. That necessitates ensuring the well-being of others.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:45 PM
2

Descartes and I would argue that you are the only proof you can truly have of anything. You can experience truth, you may perceive it right or wrong, science can explain it. I disagree. Humans cannot experience truth, only a perception of truth. When I say that science is truth, I mean that it is the most accurate depiction/understanding of our universe. In reality, real truth does not exist. You see the sky as blue Again, I disagree. What is blue? What is color? Science is observation AND expla…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:42 PM
1

No it's not, my point was that they're extremely close to alphas, but they're missing just one facet.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:25 PM
-1

I know, but no one is. Everyone has their faults.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:25 PM
0

Why? You want to live in a society run by sociopaths?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:24 PM
0

I thought we were talking about reality; not some utopian, unrealistic thought experiment. No, we're talking about how the world should be, not how it is. Gandhis don't show up everyday There are plenty of leaders who did not want power or sought power only to use it for the greater good. MLK certainly wanted power and used it to his own benefit You cannot be serious.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:16 PM
1

Yes, there are "Red Pill truths". That doesn't mean the purpose of TRP is to "glean truth". Clearly part of it is. If there is "red pill truth," then someone put the effort into creating that truth. does that mean they can't have "truths" about how the sport works? Of course they cannot. Basketball is an art not a science. There are no basketball truths.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 02:14 PM
1

Because you need ambition and drive to become a leader. Ergo, you want power. Wait what? What if you have ambition and drive to accomplish some greater goal for humanity, but no desire for power itself. In that case, power is the means to a greater end rather than the end itself. Surely you can understand the philisophical difference here. Gandhi didn't want power, but he used power to achieve a goal. The fictional character, Frank Underwood, wanted power for power's sake. Someone who doesn't wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 01:53 PM
2

Human's are bad at discerning the truth, but experiencing the truth is often the underlying force that causes them to explore, understand, and ultimately prove it. It's where hypotheses come from, the scientific method just proves or disproves it. Humans are incapable of reliably experiencing truth. Hypothesis ys not truth. Hypothesis is simply an idea. Additionally sociology experiments have nothing to do with the scientific method or anything to do with the hard sciences. This is patently fals…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 01:49 PM
-3

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 01:04 PM
1

Desire is instinct so it will never help you. Desire is not instinct, at least not with the way that user used the word. people can want something that goes against their instincts. I want a more peaceful world, but you could argue that humans have an instinct to be violent in some sotuations. I can overcome that instint by teaching myself non-violence. Logical over instinct. If you want to change society the only solution is FORCE. Gandhi and MLK called, they would like to politely disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 12:42 PM
-1

Leaders should be chosen on their real merrit, not their ability to manipulate and con people. I don't want to live in a society run by sociopaths.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 12:32 PM
-1

The best leaders are people who don't want power.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 12:25 PM
2

Fake definition? It's not a real word, so anyone can define it however they like. I'm just going off the definition from /r/niceguys.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 12:23 PM
0

Then why are there so many threads like this: http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2ozk5i/its_not_the_red_pill_truths_that_upset_the_masses/ http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2ex5sp/red_pill_truth_out_of_my_wifes_mouth_to_our/ http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2xr6ss/trp_is_not_another_pua_you_cant_just_use_it_as_a/ "Red Pill truths"
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 12:22 PM
0

You can't minus necessary variables and call it concept minus X. Why not? Isn't that how math works. 5 = 6-1 Once you minus X it ceases to be the concept. "Alpha" minus social skills =! "Alpha." I never implied anything of the sort.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 12:10 PM
1

Why do you say that?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 12:07 PM
2

2% vs 1%. Sounds similar to NPD, roughly 1.25% and .7% in the general population. There's also ASPD, which leans heavily male.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 05:08 AM
1

Manipulation is an alpha behavior according to TRP, is it not? And whining falls under the social skills category.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 04:49 AM
0

Accorsing to TRP, alpha is a series of behaviors and mindsets. Broadly, you could clasify those behaviors in to five or six general categories. NiceGuys have all those behaviors and mindsets except for social skills.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 03:50 AM
1

What? Men are twice as likely to suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). Psychologists estimate that roughly 7% of men and 3.5% of women have NPD, based on all the available data.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 03:34 AM
-1

That's a false equivilence. A business' purpose is not to glean truth. A business' purpose is to earn money. A better analogy would be this: who would you trust to comment on economics? A highly-respected academic with a PhD in Economics? Or a former CEO who made several companies profitable and took them public? Obviously you would trust the economist first and foremost.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/15 01:44 AM
3

Their comments are auto-removed. Only mods can see them (and only in subs that they moderate). Moderators have the option to approve their comments or notify them of the shadow ban.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/15 11:16 PM
1

Not my experience, YOUR experience. If you want to call questionares from a few hundred college students valid science because it came from some academic who wasn't good enough to hack it in the real world, be my guest, but I'll never put sociology psuedoscience above my own lived experience. I disagree. A well executed study is more relevant that my personal experiences. Personal experiences are subject to cognitive biases. Humans are really bad at discerning truth. That's why we use the scient…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/15 10:50 PM
1

Read any serious ethnological account of a previously-uncontacted H-G society. They ALL have chiefs/headmen. Every single damn one. Do you have a source? Some evolutionary psychologists seem to think that H-G societies are/were generally communal.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/15 10:44 PM
2

And now I'm here somehow, I really have no idea how, it was just one of the finite tabs i opened up while reading. But i am truly amazed, a subreddit that is moderate, "WUT?", "a sub that looks at both sides of the subject and actually has a sensible discussion?". Based on my two month understanding of reddit, This is like sacrilege, you are all heretics and this sub needs to be closed(based on my opinion alone of course)! I wouldn't say this sub is moderate. We're neutral. Moderation exists to …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/15 10:41 PM
-3

Agreed. "NiceGuysTM" are generally thought of as manipulative assholes who lack social skills. There are, of course, legitimately nice men, but the aren't labeled "NiceGuysTM" generally. Also, I wouldn't generally label "NiceGuys" beta. Using TRP lingo, NiceGuys are alphas minus the social skills.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/15 10:35 PM
7

I actually tend to agree. Based on the available data, I think average women in our society are better for leadership roles than men. Women are less narcissistic, less likely to have anti-social disorders, less pre-occupied with sex, and more likely to be anti-war. That said, we need to judge people on an individual basis. Statistical averages are pretty shitty at guessing a person's temperament.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/15 10:32 PM
7

You're shadow banned.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/15 10:26 PM
3

Did you read the link I posted?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 10:48 PM
6

That part must be marginalized then, because we should have seen more social change in that regard since the 1980's. Instead the 1950's narrative of a male provider lives on even in Sweden. What other explanation is there for the lack of change? Social change takes 100s of years to change, if not more. Look at voting patterns in Poland. Voting in 2007 conforms to the borders of the German empire.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 10:01 PM
5

Part of feminism is mens liberation. In the 1980s, half of the mens lib movement was absorbed into feminism, while the socially conservative half became the MRM. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_liberation_movement This liberation theory holds that men are hurt by the male gender role and patriarchy and that men's lives are alienating, unhealthy and impoverished. It is often sympathetic to feminism and seeks to emancipate men in the same manner by which women continue to seek liberation thro…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 09:37 PM
7

Society applies social pressure. The things you see on TV, the things you read in books and magazines... they tell us to behave/dress/talk/live a certain way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 09:26 PM
2

They didn't plan on it. It just happened. Maybe she made more than he did so they decided he would be a part time or full time parent. What matters is that it wasn't her goal or vision for her life.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 09:23 PM
5

Exactly. The study to which I refer specifically looked at stay-at-home dads (SAHDs). 90% of the women that chose to marry the SAHDs were happy. Unfortunately, the women who simply ended up married to SAHDs (without choosing this path) were very unhappy. The wives felt like their husbands were not caring for their children adequately. To exacerbate things, the husbands were not doing their fair share of chores around the house. The husbands were also unhappy, if I remember correctly.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 08:58 PM
7

Yeah, even in Sweden there's pressure to conform to traditional gender roles.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 08:53 PM
11

Studies also show that women who voluntarily enter this situation are happy, while those who don't enter the situation voluntarily are not happy. So women who want to earn more than their husbands are happy earning more than their husbands. The problems seems to be that couples end up in this situation without really talking it through. There's also a lot of pressure from society to conform to traditional gender roles, which surely plays a role in all this.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 08:43 PM
3

Murder with a gun and shooting someone in self defense are similar actions. Both actions can involve shooting someone dead, however murder is a crime and self defense is not a crime. In the case of the PPD altercation, one person was defending themself from another person. The individual that reacted in self defense received a temp-ban. The origional perpetrator recieved a perma ban.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 03:05 PM
5

It simply demonstrates how out of touch you are with reality. Which is again argumentum ad populum. The "majority" is not inherently correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 02:34 AM
4

A woman laughing at a man for trying to be dominant is malicious. That's just your opinion. The OP didn't give enough information to be certain. That was my original argument. You can invoke semantics all you want, but it's not rocket science. My comment was the most upvoted in that thread. It's very 'strange' that you have trouble arriving at the simple, obvious conclusion that most other people have come to based off OPs comments. Argumentum ad populum is always a solid argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/15 02:17 AM
2

No shit. MY INTENTION was to make a point with my statement. Not attack someone. I was trapping you into making my point for me, and it worked like a charm. I fully expected your response, but I really don't care. Your intent was clear, and that's why I removed your comment. Just recently the mods banned a user for intent, while we largely witheld punishment from another user who commited the same crime. It's something we deal with every day. You assigned an intent that was made up on your part …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 09:58 PM
2

Maybe for you, in the ethical system you favor. I understand that you're a mod here, and you have some level of "authority" (ha). However, you've trolled me in the past and got your ass handed to you (in a debate) so any judgement on your part of my intentions will likely be colored. Such a serious tragedy. Outside of reddit, it still holds that intent doesn't outweigh actions. You intended to go and talk to him. You punch him instead? Too bad; you're in trouble. You intended to punch him. You e…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 09:29 PM
5

It's almost like you view me laughing at women as a malicious personal attack. It is for you, apparently. It is not malicious for me. I judged you on your intent, not your actions. Intent matters more than actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 09:07 PM
2

I'd be especially interested in hearing RPW's opinion on this stuff. If you, yourself, are Red Pill, then perhaps you should have posted this on /r/RedPillWomen? It's a relatively open community. Anyway, I've made the flair "Ask BP and RPW."
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 07:17 PM
4

She said her Mom laughs AT her Dad. My wife laughs at me all the time. I laugh at my wife all the time. It's not malicious. It's lighthearted. We both have a sense of humor. For you, however, laughing seems to be a malicious attack on personal dignity.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 07:00 PM
3

No personal attacks, please. Our community rules are in the sidebar.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 06:56 PM
2

You are the one making the assumption here No, you made the assumption that laughing implies a lack of respect. Literally. That's literally what you said. Verbatim. Word for word.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 05:05 PM
5

Perhaps OP meant "laugh with"? You're assuming that the laughing is malicious. Normally lauging within a relationship is the exact opposite of malicious.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/15 01:44 PM
2

Our report queue is pretty much always empty. I check it 15 times a day and I rarely see more than 1 comment in the queue. Most of the time, there are no comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/15 05:57 PM
3

No, I said they just avoid "the pill subreddits," as in /r/TheBluePill, /r/PurplePillDebate, and /r/TheRedPill, or anything with "pill" in the name. Once you get tired/bored of something, you generally don't go back.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/15 04:24 PM
2

Relevant is subjective. In a way, OP was saying that analyzing common human interactions is off-putting. I don't think it's the analysis that's off-putting, but the cynicism of the analysis.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/15 04:14 PM
2

It's better than what the OP offered as proof, which was literally nothing. In fact, he even claimed divorce rates are lower in Eastern Europe. Last time I checked, the divorce rate in Russia is 50%.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/15 12:17 AM
6

I agree with you except for one point. I don't think there's anything wrong with analyzing common human interaction. Where BPers or anti-TRPers seem to disagree with TRP is on the causes and the judgement of those interactions.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 09:24 PM
2

No, you're trolling, because the US is still number 1 in divorce. Not true at all. The US is far from number one in divorce. Furthermore, the poverty rate in Lithuania is 4%. The poverty rate in the US is 15%. You have no idea what you're talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 08:30 PM
1

I mean, the US is at 53% and Russia is at 50%, that's pretty much the same. Countries like Estonia and Lithuania have much higher divorce rates. So yeah, you're either a troll or your view is plain wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 08:09 PM
2

But divorce rates in Russia are just as high as they are in the US, right? Both are around 50%.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 07:41 PM
1

I think they just want to forget about it and move on.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 07:30 PM
2

What view is that?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 07:27 PM
3

It was based on surveys, not self-reported partner counts like you implied. The study used surveys to calculate a sociosexuality index based on attitudes towards sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 07:17 PM
3

True, although I believe less millennial married couples are getting divorced. It's probably because the few millennials that are getting married are either religious or very serious about their relationship. Many millennials are simply choosing cohabitation and nothing more.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 07:12 PM
4

They may have more incentive to lie but they also have more incentive to just not be complete sluts, so what's your point? My point is that western women aren't more promiscuous. Did you even read the study I linked? It did not rely on self-reports.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:54 PM
8

I don't know how reliable that figure is It's from the CDC that millennial women have yet to hit the wall. I expect the figure for divorced college educated women to go up once millennial women start divorcing their betas. Milennials are less likely to get married but also less likely to get divorced than Gen-Xers were at the same age. Divorce rates in the US are actually going down.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:53 PM
0

Most ex-RP folks I know chose to get off reddit completely. From my experience, they want to distance themselves as much as possible from the pill subreddits.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:46 PM
3

So basically, what we want is pushback. The essence of debate is disagreement. We also want to avoid strawman arguments. The new rules seek to end circlejerking through link-flair enforcement. Let's say a RPer makes a thread asking a quasi-rhetorical-leading question. Well, we're going to flair that thread "CMV" or "Question for BluePill." Any top answers that agree with the OP will get deleted. Any RP strawman arguments will get deleted.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:44 PM
6

You just completely dodged my question. You were the one who made this CMV thread. Do you want your view challenged or not? Do you want to seriously discuss this topic or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:17 PM
9

I got it. So if the divorce rate is 20% among college educated people, then there's a 12.8% chance of a women initiating divorce between two college educated people. Is that not low?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:15 PM
13

You think western women are lying more than eastern women? Why? Eastern women in traditional cultures have more of an incentive to lie about their sexual history, not less of an incentive.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:05 PM
10

Yeah, but I didn't care if she was a virgin or not. Even if she wasn't a virgin, her college degree means that her chance of getting divorced is less than 20%. Those are much better odds than the "50%" you see thrown around.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 06:03 PM
9

First of all, I am married to a college educated women and my wife was a virgin when we met. Secondly, who cares if a women had sex in college? A college educated women is less likely to get divorced, period.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 05:57 PM
10

more promiscuous I'm going to go ahead and doubt this. This study (pdf) tested promiscuity and found that the US is less promiscuous than Croatia, Lithuania, and Slovenia. You can also find studies that compare the number of sexual partners, and Eastern Europe really isn't significantly different.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 05:54 PM
12

more likely to divorce rape (70% divorce initiation rate) I really dislike the use of this stat. I'm a white college educated man. If I marry a white college educated women, my chance of divorce is less than 20%. The chance of my wife initiating divorce is just over 12%. Those are perfectly acceptable odds.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/15 05:44 PM
6

Clearly implying this being a fault in the relationship dynamic. Yes, abussive relationships are considered dysfunctional because they're unethical. They work, but they don't work in a way that maintains agency for both parties. So it depends on your definition of "functional." You could very well make this the official BP stance, but it's not going to make any headway with TRP'ers. It'd be no different than if I suggested that BP'ers are only the way they are because they were raised by lesbian…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 02:02 AM
7

The notion that relationships fail when there is a power imbalance is idealistic fantasy; Where did you read that? Of course relationships work when there's a power imbalance. Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? The question is not what works. The question is what's ethical. there was even an article submitted in PPD that showed that relationships without power imbalances were the quickest to fail. I disagreed strongly with the article. I'm also not sure of what fallacies you speak of. Perhaps you…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/15 12:37 AM
1

But their natural demeanor is holding frame. We already established that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/15 12:12 AM
2

So holding frame isn't always good. So why does TRP say to always hold frame?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/15 10:54 PM
2

True, but at least his demeanor/frame is somewhat amiable. So "holding frame" = being yourself? TRP's advice to hold frame equates to "be attractive, don't be unattractive." Isn't that exactly what TRP criticizes BPers for?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/15 10:11 PM
1

Holding frame is about social dominance. If your "frame" is just any demeanor, then any can hold frame and it isn't necessarily good. An anti-social person could hold frame by being anti-social. A weirdo could hold frame by being weird. Your "holding frame" is literally "be yourself."
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/15 09:56 PM
1

But the frame that UFO guy did have, not a care in the world, happy and enthusiastic wasn't disturbed at all by the interviewer's dick move. That's not "frame" though. It's just ambivalence. He kept his frame and while it might not be the best frame when you think of seduction, it's still a good example of holding frame in my opinion. You can construe anything as a good example of anything if you're really willing. Holding frame specifically refers to social dominance. This is not social dominan…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/15 09:47 PM
1

I disagree. According to TRP, maintaining frame is about social dominance over a conversation. You're always supposed to control the meaning and direction of the conversation. The interviewer clearly established his social dominance, but the UFO guy just didn't care.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/15 09:04 PM
5

That's why I don't get into the "women want rape" threads. I think sexually assertive approaches by physically/socially dominant males are favored, and that those approaches by those men are thereby not met with active resistance; it's not "rape" since it's voluntary. I don't necessarily agree with all of this, but I agree that you have clearly demonstrated the circular reasoning in the OP. If Vornash is going to use this framework for thinking, he cannot call it "rape." Rape is non-consensual s…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:30 PM
4

A socially dominant male may decide to rape just because a woman recently had sex with another male, so it's a sperm competition. Says who? If he's really so attractive, then it would be consensual sex. You're whole theory is based on circular reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:18 PM
5

However I can think of another example. Consider what it was like to live in prehistoric times, perhaps before language. If a woman is about to be raped by one of the lowest status males she may run to any relatively stronger/higher status male that can prevent that negative reproductive outcome. If that male in turn has sex or even rapes her she just had her chance of being raped and impregnated by that same undesirable male later that day or week considerably reduced. But this is an argument a…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:15 PM
3

A woman who passes along genes that predispose her sons to be dominant, high T, assertive, etc., (and if we assume those traits are likely to lead to more offspring) she wins, evolutionarily. Why would rapists be dominant, have high T, and be assertive. If they were socially dominant, they wouldn't need to rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:11 PM
2

Just wanted to chime in. I changed the flair to "Discussion." Also, PPD is a neutral community where pretty much anything regarding gender and sex is on topic. Thanks for your question.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:06 PM
3

He also describes some conditions in the ancestral environment during which the reproductive gains from rape may have outweighed the costs: Right, but the men gained from rape, not the women. I don't see why women would want to be raped.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:03 PM
1

This is a CMV post. You didn't disagree with the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:01 PM
1

Vornnash, this is a CMV post. Unless I missed something, you didn't disagree with the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 07:00 PM
6

It also suggests that there may have been something in our ancestral environment that made certain types of rape advantageous for both men and women. Maybe I missed that part. Can you quote it?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 06:57 PM
0

Linking to our own subreddit without NP links is still something we want to avoid. Vote manipulation and brigading can absolutely happen within subreddits.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 06:54 PM
8

and in women who have fantasies about certain types of rape (usually involving being ravished safely by a high value man) I agreed with you up until this point. It doesn't fit at all with the wikipedia article you posted. The article talked about how rape is tool that men use when they have no other alternative. With that reasoning, the only logical deduction suggests that rape is something women would want to avoid at all costs. It's not something women would fantasize about. Based on what you …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 06:45 PM
1

So to recap: I'm debating someone else. I make a point; was upvoted. The person I was responding to deleted their comments/account (probably due to embarrassment). You chime in with some semantic, PC drivel in hopes of degrading my comment. At the very least, you successfully derail whatever meaningful discussion might have taken place over the content of my post. We debate. You invoke weighty subjects like dichotomies, logic, and semantics (proudly, I might add). I reduce your argument to absur…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 12:16 AM
0

I'm not claiming any "truth." I'm referencing a phenomenon that is apparent and reported often. Again, as with most things related to human behavior, getting the empirical "truth" is hardly the only basis for establishing patterns of behavior. Much behavior is hard to ground in empirical fact. Ask any psychologist (or economist). My point is that you can either claim something is scientific or you can claim that it isn't. You can't straddle the fence. Straddling the fence is pseudoscience. Um, t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/15 12:06 AM
1

So I guess you're learning. Great. Thank you, oh great teacher. I don't know where I'd be without your guidance.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 11:44 PM
2

I have seen some evidence for a biological explanation (again, the unbelievable complexity of the hormonal exchange between mother and child - that may have nothing to do with it, but I then wonder what that process is doing, if not that), but not as much for a cultural explanation. That's why I lean towards "instinctual." I would welcome solid evidence to the contrary, however. I have no interest in being dogmatic. I'm sorry, but do you know how deductive reasoning works? You don't conclude som…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 10:36 PM
0

I don't think it's as common as you claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 09:48 PM
1

What I am observing (and what I have heard reported) leads me to believe that the phenomenon operates on an instinctual level, in that it appears with a certain amount of uniformity for the majority of women, regardless of any specific culture or background or societal norms. So it's pseudoscience. You're claiming something is innate based on non-scientific evidence. Is it possible that it's the result of our current cultural gender roles? I guess so, but I'm not yet persuaded that changing our …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 09:10 PM
2

Men, on average, like hot women. That would be a more accurate statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 09:02 PM
2

Yup, they do. I disagree. I've never seen them dismiss all heuristics.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 09:01 PM
1

If by gender roles you mean biological gender roles, then I would agree. There's no evidence that they're biological. What specific genes are resulting in these gender roles? The separation anxiety mothers experience when leaving their child and going back to work after maternity leave is much more severe for them than it is for the fathers. And this is biological evidence?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 07:57 PM
5

Having been a full-time (now part-time) SAHD, partially due to choice and partially due to circumstance, I can confirm all of this from my experience and the experience of the few other SAHDs I know. It's definitely an issue that needs to be addressed within the feminism movements. Men are often criticized by women for venturing away from a traditionally masculine gender role.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 07:18 PM
3

There are significantly more stay at home dads than there were 10, 20, 50 years ago. Today in the US, there are more than 2 million stay at home dads with children between the ages of 0 and 18, which is roughly double the number of stay at home dads in 1990. Even still, there's a disparity between the number of SAH dads and SAH moms. Why? It's likely comes down simply to gender roles. When Americans are polled, most people will say it's beneficial for women to stay home and raise kids if they ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 07:13 PM
11

As BP dismisses heuristics as ineffective and unethical (don't deny BP, keep doubling down on the ideology) Do they really? I would personally call dread game unethical, but not the use of heuristics. We all use heuristics.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 05:08 PM
26

This is the easiest CMV post ever. Humor is subjective. Satire isn't always intended to be humorous.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/15 12:20 AM
2

This is an Ask BP thread. Please see our stickied community guidelines if you're curious why your comment was removed.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 10:48 PM
1

Not exactly. The prosecutor would ask what reason you had to assume a felony was taking place. If you didn't have a good resson and there was no additional evidence, then it would be assumed that a felony was not taking place. You would likely be convicted of murder or manslaughter. At least, that's how the law is written.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 09:38 PM
1

This is exactly the kind of pissant semantic crap I'm talking about. You want me to do what? To use the wording, "Statistically, the use of ad hominem arguments is associated with an incorrect viewpoint"? LOL. Are you high? Does anyone actually speak like this? How can rational discussion take place if people like you want to force everyone to use this careful, kind, inoffensive, politically correct language? This is a debate sub. Have you ever taken a debate class or a philosophy/logic class? T…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 09:08 PM
1

But you have to prove that a felony was taking place. You can't just shoot trespassers. Even weilding your weapon at unarmed tresspassers is considered assault with a deadly weapon.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 08:58 PM
0

"Castle Doctrine" is no duty to retreat from your own home in the face of force/invasion by an intruder. In some cases. Castle Doctrine can extend to several other locations as well. Also, castle doctrine can define who counts as an intruder. Imagine a scenario where a husband is attacking his wife. Is he an intruder? "Stand Your Ground" brings the same level of legal protection to legally occupied public spaces. Not always. Again, it's not nearly as simple as you imply. Stand-your-ground can ap…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 07:03 PM
3

If you fine with deductive reasoning, just look at who the wedding industry is mainly marketed towards. Mainly women. Look at all the TV shows where wedding planning is involved. Who's the main person who wants an expensive wedding? Mainly women. Where ar bridal magazines advertised to? Women. I'm not disagreeing with you. I was merely pointing out that you need to rely on more than "common knowledge."
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 06:53 PM
0

Florida started it, other states are following. Only the most pussified of liberal, blue states will keep duty to retreat. Dude, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Many states have duty-to-retreat AND stand-your-ground. They're not incomparable. For example, Massachusetts and duty-to-retreat AND stand-your-ground. In some spaces and circumstances, you have duty to retreat. In other circumstances, you have a right to stand your ground. Nearly every state has this type of arrangem…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 05:47 PM
4

Okay go find them. I won't believe you can find the study until you show me. http://www2.hawaii.edu/~elaineh/13.pdf Then show me a study that says that the sky is indeed blue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering Then show me a study that people do not like getting hit in the face with a metal baseball bat. - Wait what? You can't find a study that supports something so common sense? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pain Well I'll wait until you find those studies before I waste my time d…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 05:41 PM
0

Are they? What states have completely eliminated duty to retreat recently? Castle doctrine and "stand-your-ground" is popular, but it's not completely incompatible with duty to retreat.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 05:33 PM
0

Anyone is capable of being a deadly weapon under the right circumstances. "Deadly weapon" is a subjective term often defined in court on a case by case basis.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 05:29 PM
0

Attend any self defense course, and they'll tell you that you may legally defend yourself until the threat to your safety has been effectively neutralized. This is true in most circumstances, but some states have duty to retreat laws. If someone threatens you, you have a duty to escape before engaging in violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 05:25 PM
-1

In my state I can I was stating my opinion, not law. So you're telling me that if a 250 lb man starts punching a 135 lb woman into submission, she isn't justified in using a gun, a knife, or mace to stop him In that case, the man is a deadly weapon and she's justified in using deadly force.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 05:23 PM
6

I mean it's like you're asking for proof that men generally like physical attractive women - of course they are. There are somethings that are just common knowledge. Except I could post links to 1000s of studies that show men like physically attractive women and that women like physically attractive men. In a debate, you cannot defend your stance with "common sense." If somethings true, then there should be actually evidence to support that assertion.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 05:19 PM
1

You're shadow banned. Check with the admins.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 04:31 PM
4

There isn't any data showing that the reason for that is because women don't want: a ring, a wedding, honeymoon, social status, memories Well since you're making this claim, do you have any statistical evidence to suggest that it's true?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 04:26 PM
2

No. Proportional force is exactly what I meant. If someone threatens you with less than deadly force, you can use less than deadly force to defend yourself. So if someone attacks you with their fists, you can't pull a gun on them and shoot them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 04:20 PM
2

I mean how can you scream that men and women are equal in every way and totally believe it too but then say a man should never hit a woman. This is fucking stupid. People should never hit people. Anyone is justified in defending themselves with proportional force.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 03:27 PM
2

I removed your comment for cirlejerking. Community guidelines can be found in the stickied post.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/15 01:19 AM
1

Sure, it's not true in 100% of cases, but those would be exceptions to the rule. But logic is a dichotomy. A statement can be logically true or logically false, based on an agreed set of assumptions. There are no shades of gray. There are no exceptions. "Statistically, the use of ad hominem arguments is associated with an incorrect viewpoint," could be an accurate statement. "The fact that you're using an ad hominem proves that you don't have a leg to stand on," is an incorrect statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 11:38 PM
0

It isn't proof positive per se, but a good indicator. But you said: "If your argument had any merit, you wouldn't have to resort to these kind of attacks." That's verifiably untrue. I could disprove it right now by saying this: You're an idiot. My argument is correct and I used ad hominem. [Disclaimer, I don't actually think you're an idiot]
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 10:18 PM
0

What's more is that you actually seem to think an ad hominem attack buttresses your 'position'. In fact, an ad hominem attack reveals that the person making them has NO leg to stand on in the debate and is intellectually bankrupt. That's actually the fallacy fallacy. The use of ad hominem attacks don't prove that the argument is poor, they merely fail to prove anything. They are just there. And /u/MoonwalkOnLandmines, linking to your own drama is against the rules on PPD. Please remove the post …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 07:35 PM
4

Maybe not "manipulation" per se, but for a forum that has a "no downvoting" rule, RP people sure seem to get downvoted a hell of a lot for having an opinion on something that Bloopers don't agree with. Actually, we've been having more of a problem with Blue Pillers getting downvoted recently. But yes, downvotes are a problem. I know that as mods, there's really not a whole lot you can do about that (as far as I know), but IMHO, there's really no reason to have a rule that is completely unenforce…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 06:57 PM
1

In what form?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 06:51 PM
11

I don't know if it's the sex drive per say, or the emotional attachment. I love sex. But I do not love sex with randoms. I have a high sex drive for the person I am emotionally attached to. It's important to note that when I say "sex drive," I mean the frequency at which you think about sex, in general. You're right that it is different for every person and there exists overlap between genders, but on average men think more about sex than women. Furthermore, "sex drive" has nothing to do with en…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 04:01 AM
6

Honestly, I think that men think about sex more than women. That gender difference, alone, could theoretically explain this phenomenon. If you're thinking about sex more often, then obviously you're going to be more likely to interpret certain actions as sexual. And for those that might doubt the gender difference in sex drive, it's pretty well established in mainstream psychology. Several meta-analyses have found gender differences in the frequency with which men vs women think about sex. The c…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 03:52 AM
2

Phokus, this is an AskBP thread, which means primary responses should be from BPers. You're free to respond to those responses however you'd like.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/15 03:44 AM
2

I'd say you have an interesting and semi-unique situation, because I've never met a guy who'd rather have a bossy woman. I have to say, I don't want a women bossing me around, but I definitely like bossy women. I like faux fighting and bickering with my wife. I like that she's opinionated and always speaks her mind. I like to be intellectually challenged. I also don't think that my preferences are that unusual. I know plenty of men that enjoy the same type of relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/15 04:35 PM
1

To be fair, /r/AskHistorians has been just as critical of some RP "history" that's floating around.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/15 04:29 PM
1

Just to add to what babyboomer said, if you want a post where bosth RPers and BPers respond, you need to: Make Debate/Discussion style post with a question that targets neither BPers nor RPers (ie "What do you think of this blog post?" or "What is your opinion on the concept of...?") Make Science post that links to a study
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/15 04:26 PM
6

And don't commit to men that aren't virgins.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/15 02:05 AM
8

Jesus christ. We just changed the rules yesterday. Give it some time. And report some comments. None of those commentsyou complain about are ever reported.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/15 02:04 AM
10

I don't know if you noticed, but we just changed the rules yesterday to deal with that exact problem. You want us to go back in time and edit threads based on he new rules?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/15 02:03 AM
5

Fascinating. Thanks for the link.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 11:07 PM
1

What idea? The study didn't list the specific numbers for men. We have absolutely no way of comparing men to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:53 PM
9

You don't have the specific numbers since they weren't reported in the study. They didn't report male satisfaction (other than saying it was lower), so we have no way to compare them.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:51 PM
5

No criclejerking, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:49 PM
1

Why do you suppose its only for women and not for men though? The subsequent relationships thing I don't know. Without specific numbers it's hard to say. That study from the OP is rather vague with the numbers.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:44 PM
1

Where does it say "SIGNIFICANTLY". You're just making shit up at this point. Significantly, as in statistically significant. If you want to talk specifics, why don't you post the actual numbers?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:38 PM
1

Hold on a sec. If this is you're argument... This is what we mean when we talk about the consequences of unchecked hypergamy. Women fucking around with high SMV players end up with fucked up proprieties and a distorted sense of their own worth, and are no longer LTR material as a result. Then you're assertion that these studies support your argument is wrong. Correlation and causation. This study doesn't prove that the sexual relationships is the cause of the unhappiness. It merely proves that t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:19 PM
5

The woman, meanwhile, is affected by the first and each subsequent sexual relationship. Yes and no. We don't know the cause of the statistical relationship, we only know the correlation. You can't say that the increase in sex partners caused the unhappiness.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:12 PM
1

OK? I'm not /u/EnderVaped, so I don't see what their opinion has to do with mine.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:11 PM
1

You're not reading this right. While those men who reported only having their wives as their only sexual partners had the highest quality marriage, the men who had more sexual partners didn't drop significantly in a statistically significant way while the WOMEN DID. The men who had previous sexual partners reported less marital happiness. The only difference between men and women is that the womens' happiness progressively decreased from a partner count of 1 to 4 and beyond. Men with 0 partners …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 10:09 PM
1

That minority of men and women reported higher marital quality than those who had had sex with other partners prior to marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 09:55 PM
1

I think you misread my comment. Your study found that men who only had sex with their wife reported happier marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 09:39 PM
1

But my study isn't completely irreverent. Furthermore, your study found that men who only had sex with with their wife reported happier marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 09:30 PM
4

That minority of men and women reported higher marital quality than those who had had sex with other partners prior to marriage. So men that had sex only with their wife reported higher marital quality.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 09:28 PM
4

That's 82 people. It's not an unusual sample size. Many studies of this nature have around 100 subjects.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 08:27 PM
4

Fair enough, but one of the links from my previous comment yielded this: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/226141632_Premarital_Sex_and_Marital_Satisfaction_of_Middle_Aged_Men_and_Women_A_Study_of_Married_Lithuanian_Couples Men who had more premarital partners and cohabitation experience, were less satisfied with their marriages. For women, younger onset of sexual activity and larger number of premarital partners was related to lower marital satisfaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 08:23 PM
2

I think we're comparing apples to oranges here, my study deals with marriage satisfaction Yeah, the very study you posted found that men are also happier with their marriages when they have only had sex with their wife. Also, I'm hypothesizing the reasoning would be way different for men: A man who has had a high partner count is probably used to a lot of sex, but after getting married, they get into a dead bedroom situation. A man with a high partner count would probably have a higher self este…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 08:12 PM
7

What about this PPD post? http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2ed6bn/men_premarital_sex_divorce_and_marital/
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 07:59 PM
8

Well these studies disagree: http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2ed6bn/men_premarital_sex_divorce_and_marital/
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 07:58 PM
12

For one, the very study from the OP finds that men with fewer partners are happier. Do people even read these things? Or are they just skipping to the point that confirms their previously held viewpoint?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 07:53 PM
19

Not to mention that there are studies that show men with fewer partners also have better marriages. In fact, some studies have show that the effect is greater for men than it is for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 07:43 PM
6

regular RP circlejerking which isn't against the rules. Circlejerking is against the rules. We have 4 or 5 rules just to deal with circlejerking.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 07:39 PM
9

We wouldn't remove either of those comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 07:38 PM
0

I didn't remove the post. /u/hyperrreal did. Like I said, you can repost it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 01:41 PM
0

OP, titles need to be neutral. It's one of our rules designed to prevent circlejerking. You can resubmit the post with a neutral title. Just copy and paste the body, if you want. Unfortunately, we cannot edit the title once a post is made.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 03:00 AM
1

As a long time TRPer, that guy's post was incredibly shit. That sub is going to shit with all these noobies coming in and upvoting whatever they think is "alpha". People have been saying this for months now. Is it actually getting worse? I think I still prefer /r/becomeaman over TRP. /r/becomeaman can be a little bit wierd, but it's what TRP claims to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 02:54 AM
9

So agreeding with someone's post is fine. Circlejerking is when you regurgitate the same argument, along with a "and BP/RPers totally suck, amirite" type of line. Circlejerking is congratulating eachother for destroying a lame strawman.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 01:37 AM
6

I don't see any reason purples can't respond. We just don't want strawman arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 12:35 AM
3

Even if a man was single, women will still find him attractive if other women display interest in him. This isn't something men do and is exclusively found in women. If a woman was surrounded by men, my attraction for her does not increase. As dumb as this all sounds, it's been observed many times in PUA and TRP. And it is not the same as jealousy. But we're talking about dread game. Dread game is used exclusively on plates and girlfriends and wives. And dread game absolutely works both ways. A …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 11:10 PM
2

Reddit bans links to Elite Daily. I actually had to manually approve this post after it got caught in reddit's spam filter. So clearly reddit has a distaste for ED as well. Also, it has the same abbreviation as Erectile Distention.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 10:33 PM
2

This is a CMV thread. Parent/primary comments should challenge the OP in some way. You're free to edit your comment if you can find an area of disagreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 10:17 PM
6

You did a great job supporting the "don't listen to the fish" rule though in any case. Let's be honest though. In this case, it's more of "don't listen to an person that gets paid to write shitty articles for a shitty online publication."
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 10:15 PM
3

Even if you take TRP out of existence, this 'evo-psych' still exists in the PUA community and they are largely successful with it. This is correlation/causation error in logic. Just because a technique works, it doesn't mean that some evopsych theory is the cause. Why does the technique work? You're never going to find out by speculating about evo-psych on the internet. Most actual scientists don't even know why many human behaviors exist. You think a bunch of young men on the internet suddenly …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 09:52 PM
4

I disagree that feminism is a sexual strategy. I disagree that women love opportunistically. I think women can love men in the same way that men love women. I disagree with nearly all the evo-psych conclusions of TRP. I think dread game is psychological manipulation and immoral. I think "plating" often forces men to use dread game tactics. I don't believe that women have an advantage in our society.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 09:32 PM
8

Then you are essentially TRP in that regard. You may not want to put a label on it, but that's just how it is. If that's your definition, then probably everyone here is Red Pill. I've never seen someone on this sub advocate putting women on a pedestal. Never. Not once. I don't read TBP so I wouldn't know what gets posted there, but I know that the so called BP men here have never advocated putting women on a pedestal. So I guess we're all RP. I see that a lot of people find it confusing as to wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 09:04 PM
10

I'm in my mid 20s. I never said that guys don't act like this, I said that BP men (aka men that post on TBP) don't behave like this. As far as myself, I never put women on a pedestal either. Maybe I did when I was a freshman in high school, but I learned really fast that equality means equality. You treat women the same way you treat men. Women don't deserve preferential treatment, nor do they want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 08:44 PM
1

this sub is a circlejerk now. That's why we made this new rule and are coming down hard on circlejerking.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 08:39 PM
3

I don't think any of the guys I know behave in the way you describe.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 08:36 PM
1

FTFY....imo. I know that, as a woman, it's hard to read things, like my above post, that hurt your emotions. Enough with the circlejerking.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 08:33 PM
15

Men's romantic gestures and 'niceness' come from some universal socio-karmic belief that by doing 'good', 'good' will come to them. So by being nice to women, they believe that women will like them for it (hence the 'good' will come to them). Unfortunately, that isn't how things work. These guys will pedestalize women, shower them with gifts, rides, etc., pretty much giving away their time, effort and resources because it is 'romantic'. It is what is 'expected of men to do'. After all, chivalry,…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 08:19 PM
4

This is a CMV thread. You need to challenge the OP's view in some way in primary responses. I can reinstate your comment if you find something to challenge.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 02:59 PM
4

Ah but the phrase "wage gap" suggests the gap exists because of gender discrimination. No it doesn't. It inplies that there's a statistical difference in income. That's it. I even specified this in my origional comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 01:45 AM
4

But there's still a gap. exploring the possible causes, including both different choices being made by women or differences in the natural skills of each gender. Of course that's still just guessing but she knows what she's talking about more than most being very rational and having written multiple books on this kind of thing. Yeah, we're not talking about the causes. I originally claimed that there was a gap. There is a gap. I didn't make any other claims.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 01:05 AM
3

I've never seen data from a reliable source that didn't find an unexplained wage gap
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/15 12:46 AM
2

That be the key word. That's why I said, "Is it an issue? I don't know." It's a whole 'nother issue altogether. But you claimed there's no wage gap. Overall, there is a wage gap.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 11:13 PM
4

Doesn't exist. The unexplained wage gap does exist. It's about 5 to 7 cents on the dollar. Is it an issue? I don't know, but there is a gender wage gap even when you account for hours worked, job, seniority, ect.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 11:05 PM
1

Primary responses in CMV threads should challenge the OP's view. Just a heads up for next time.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 10:24 PM
0

Top level comments in CMV threads should disagree with the OP, in some way.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 10:22 PM
0

Top level comments in CMV threads should challenge the OP in some way.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 10:20 PM
3

My GF went to buy flowers for her mom this year and saw the prices for the first time. She requested that I did not get flowers this year. I have never bought my wife flowers in all the years we've been together. I told her when we started dating that I am against the labor practices where many flours are grown. They're not necessary, and the land could be used for growing more important shit. She agreed with me. That said, I'll happily buy live plants from our local gardening center.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 10:08 PM
5

some women insist on that: they indeed want her man to, as the guy in the OP said, "waste resources on her whim" only to bea able to show off her new shinies. If a women was really that shallow, then I would readily criticize them. That's a pretty shitty thing to do... "spend money on me just because"
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 10:03 PM
3

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 09:23 PM
1

Honestly, I think there should be a separate sub for this type of thing. If we had a better balance on the sub it wouldn't be a problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 09:12 PM
1

Extremism is determined by ideological position relative to the median. The median in our society is what I would call "near-feminist-egalitarianism." Essentially, it's the belief that women are still disproportionately at a disadvantage, and society should continue implementing policy that is gender neutral. TRP is perceived as pretty far from that median. TRP is anti-feminist. I would guess that less than 15% of our society (roughly 30% of men) could be described as definitively anti-feminist.…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 09:01 PM
-3

No? Is that really what you got from my comment? TRPers are perceived to be as extremists. Extremists generally aren't taken seriously by people in the mainstream. That's all I'm saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 08:40 PM
1

Off-topic. No subredditcancer drama here, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 08:37 PM
1

No circlejerking, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 08:35 PM
-2

Go into any setting and say "I'm a neo-nazi, here's my opinion on race." People will shit on you. Why? Because people don't take neo-nazi's seriously. The same goes for TRP. Most people outside TRP don't take TRP seriously. People view TRP as a group of irrational reactionary extremists. When a group is perceived as so extreme, most people aren't even going to listen to your arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 08:24 PM
5

Well, it's hard for me to link to a bunch of deleted examples, not to mention is posting example of doxxing a continuation of doxxing itself? Let me just say this. If you ever see anything that could be interpreted as doxing or the threat of doxing, screen shot it and PM it to a mod. This stuff should always be discussed over PMs. But in the end, here's the thing, just as a lot of the argument of TBP/SRS against TRP is that they create an environment for mysogyny, rape, whatever stupid thing com…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 06:18 PM
3

Would you say I'm intentionally misunderstanding you? Kidding. It's difficult to judge intent, and we can't punish people for being stupid. If it's obvious, it will fall under circlejerking and we can remove it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 06:03 PM
6

I'm talking TBP mods who are often SRS and other such subs members. Well that's just as ridiculous. TBP bans people for even suggesting anything about doxing. http://www.reddit.com/r/TheBluePill/comments/290bke/not_cool_guys/ We will not tolerate witch hunts. Do not target users to make them feel bad. Don't even joke about doxxing. If we catch any of you doing these things, you will be banned. Reddit admins are just garbage in general. I've never had a problem with the admins. I think they do a …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 05:42 PM
2

Misunderstanding, by definition, is unintentional. "Intentional misunderstanding" is really just trolling. I feel like that's plainly obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 05:30 PM
3

They condone doxxing by their oft inaction. It's like how mafia kings don't "condone" drugs or anything else. Wink Wink. Look the other way. Here are some related subreddits you can post those juicy tidbits at. Are you claiming that the reddit admins condone doxing? Really? They shadow ban people on sight for doxing and vote manipulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 05:03 PM
2

Intentional misunderstanding isn't possible, so no.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:41 PM
2

TBP doesn't "condone" brigading, but they did for the longest time. First of all, there is no rule against "brigading." There is a rule against "vote manipulation." What is illegal or legal under reddit's vote manipulation rules? Legal: Linking to other reddit threads Following those links and taking part in the discussion Voting in those linked threads Illegal: Asking people to comment or vote in linked threads Suggesting that people should go "support you" in linked threads Implying in any way…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:26 PM
3

There was an incident recently where someone threatened to dox and got banned from TBP. I believe it was about a month ago. I hope they continue to take it seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:19 PM
2

However, in the past they haven't been enforced for those terms as long as the comments add discussion. From the new guideline: "comments should add to the conversation, not sabotage it." So nothing has changed regarding word choise. We're going to be tougher TBP brigading and tougher on threads with nothing but RP comments expressing the same RP views.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:18 PM
4

Just FYI, /r/theredpillcirclejerk is a TumblrInAction sub controlled by the TiA mods. It's not related to to TBP.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:09 PM
3

Second of all, I would like to know the answer too. The specifics of the aspect of the rule in question have not changed for 6 months. This was the old rule: Don't circlejerk and avoid leading questions designed to put people on the defensive. What is circlejerking within the context of Purple Pill Debate? Any snarky comment that contains mocking terms (alfalfa, white knight) designed to insult, or otherwise perturb users. Humor is fine, but comments should also proactively add to the discussion…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:06 PM
4

But the mods don't condone it and they actively fight it. That was the point of this post. TBP does not dox people. People dox people.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:01 PM
4

http://www.reddit.com/r/TheBluePill/comments/290bke/not_cool_guys/ TBP mod post: I want it to be clear that this is not directed at the majority of the userbase, but it is directed at the extremely vocal minority that has popped up. We will not tolerate witch hunts. Do not target users to make them feel bad. Don't even joke about doxxing. If we catch any of you doing these things, you will be banned.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:00 PM
3

Just a friendly reminder to all RP men watching not to fall into the trap of reading stuff like this, thinking you won't be doxxed and letting yourself slip up. I never said you won't be doxed. The point of this post was to highlight three things: The TBP mods don't condone doxing and take swift action to prevent/limit doxing We have an even stricter definition of doxing, given the sensitive nature of our subreddit Many of the rumors that go around are false Doesn't matter what the mods say. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 03:58 PM
2

When you delete your account, your posts/comments remain, but no user name appears above the posts/comments. It looks like an anonymous person wrote the comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 03:51 PM
3

People dox people. Subreddits don't dox people, and if they do, they get banned. The point of my post was to highlight that TBP does not condone doxing. There were people in the PPD thread using my own statement to claim that TBP mods support doxing. I was setting the record straight. TBP, as a subreddit, is against doxing. Anyone who doxes or threatens to dox will be banned from TBP, reported to the admins, and the TBP mods will share the relevant information with us so we can ban them as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 03:50 PM
2

I was misleading. People took my words and used them to argue that "TBP doxes." I absolutely should have chosen my words more carefully.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 01:18 PM
12

LOL. Who gives a fuck what the blue pill moderators think? This is not their sub so they can't demand that you do anything. Dude, I was fucking wrong. My statement lead people to believe that TBP doxes. Clearly, I wasn't clear enough. TBP obviously discourages doxing like every other sane sub. I fucked up and I apologized like a man. The TBP mods have apologized as well. They were defending themselves just as I defended PPD and things got way out of hand. When adults make mistakes, we sack up an…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 03:23 AM
14

Eh, a more accurate statement would be "TBP did not dox people, to the best of my knowledge". Your post reads less like you're issuing an apology, and more like you lost a bet. I feel like I owe them an apology, honestly. In that PPD thread I linked, people were claiming that TBP doxes. This is blatantly untrue. TBP does not dox, and the one time something happened they immediately took action to stop it. Furthermore, the TBP mods have apologized to me for the drama this created. We both fucked …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 03:19 AM
1

Listien, HarrietPotter is claiming that you couldn't google the quote to tie it back to the FB account. I have no way of verifying this. As far as I'm concerned, it was possible to google the quote and figure out who "Ilana's" husband was. For me, it qualifies as personal information even if there's a small chance the quote can be tied to a specific person. That's our official stance. I don't think there's anything else to discuss. We're all busy people and we all have stuff to do. This isn't wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 01:07 AM
4

I have no way to verify this. I'm sorry, but I just can't take your word for it. As I said earlier, "I don't know, and that's my official stance." As far as I'm concerned, it's water under the bridge at this point. I really don't care anymore. I have to go make my wife dinner.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 01:03 AM
1

It wasn't personal information. For use, we thought it was personal information. To say "it met our higher standards of doxxing" is also pretty dishonest (or at least it badly misses the point). Doxxing is what it is, and this wasn't anything like doxxing. The disagreement is clearly over what defines "personal information." We're free to interpret "personal information" in a way that serves us best. We also have a liberal definition of "circlejerking," as described here: http://www.reddit.com/r…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 12:58 AM
0

Sorry, but I don't trust your word on this one. I don't necessarily think you're lying, but I have no way of knowing how you googled those quotes and what results came up. Perhaps googling the quote in pieces or using additional information (which was available in her comment history) could have yielded results. I don't know, and that's my official stance.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 12:46 AM
2

/r/TrollPills was originally intended just for humor, but yeah I can add /r/GreenPillChat to the sidebar.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 12:35 AM
2

OK, so I went back and edited my comments to clarify. We're not going to change our definition of "personal information" because you want us to. Reddit has their rules. We have our own stricter rules.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 12:34 AM
4

Because it's a logical deduction. If you post a quote, you can good that quote and find it's source. The user in question had posted other information about her husband in the past. Combining the quote linked on TBP and that previous information could have resulted in a more serious violation. Given how the user described about the quote, and given what I already knew about that user through my interactions with her, I'm reasonably confident that I could have found her husband's facebook page if…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 12:33 AM
2

OK? We do too? But we're also going to have our own set of rules with our own definitions to ensure smooth operation of the sub. We can decide what constitutes "personal information." If our definition clashes with the definitions of other moderators, I really don't care. We mind our own business.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 12:13 AM
0

I don't think anyone has a problem with you having stricter policies than reddit does, the problem is that you are conflating reddit-wide rules with your own rules. What that user did to "Ilana" was harassment, not doxxing, and insisting it's "still doxxing but a different kind of doxxing" isn't helping your case. Doxing implies the release of personal information tied to a specific user. What qualifies as "personal information" is ultimately subjective, much like the definition of any phrase. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 12:10 AM
0

Given our most recent exchange, I'll just delete this comment and we can pretend it never happened. EDIT: Actually who the fuck cares I'll just leave it up. Of course I hope you understand why it is we have stricter policies on PPD with regards to some issues. The slightest violation of privacy could scare off many of our users. In fact, this did happen after the TBP incident. Several users felt unsafe and stopped posting here.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 11:26 PM
1

I'm telling lies? Oh no, better send me to Dolores Umbridge. She'll straighten me out. Seriously, I never intended for it to be a slap in the face. I'm honestly sorry if I offended you. I'll edit the original comments to clarify that it was our own apparently stricter policy against doxing that was violated.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 11:16 PM
-2

I said that someone was doxed. I'll stand by that statement, since it fits my own definition of doxing and the definition we use on Purple Pill Debate. I never leveled criticism at TBP or the TBP mods. If anything, I would criticize the one user responsible, the user that we banned for violating our policy on posting personal information. EDIT: I have now edited all of my original comments to express that what happened on TBP was a "dox" by our definition and our definition alone. I also clarifi…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 11:11 PM
1

You have a funny way of showing gratitude This has nothing to do with the TBP mods. I don't know why you think it does. I never leveled criticism against you. One idiotic user in TBP decided to do something that made another user feel unsafe. It's not your god damn fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 11:07 PM
0

CFRProflcopter is spouting some conveniently vague redpill propaganda. What the fuck? I, one of the most anti-RP people in this entire sub, am posting RP propaganda? Your version of what went down in 100% accurate. Furthermore, I was very satisfied with the actions of the BP mods that afternoon. I thought you guys handled things extremely well. That said... I strongly dislike and disagree with the user that was doxed, but she was justifiably terrified after what went down. I would have been terr…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 11:04 PM
1

There are literally dozens of subs on reddit where facebook screencaps are posted ALL THE TIME, with identifying info scrubbed, with the specific intent of mocking the person in question. But in this case, it was attacking a single user, and there was a threat to actually post the link which wasn't cool. None of these subs have been banned, or will be banned, because fucking nobody considers that doxx. What the fuck are you talking about? I never say any subs should be banned? I thought you guys…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 10:55 PM
1

If the person post their own picture, that's not doxing. The issue is that many RPers feel the need to hide their identity since they fear discrimination (I know, it's kind of ironic). The user who got "doxed" deleted her account and was very shaken. Maybe we have a stricter definition than others, but that's just the way it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 10:33 PM
2

I don't know about TRP, but I considered the incident to be doxing. Someone posted information from a user's husband's facebook page. The user got scared enough to immediately delete his/her account. We permabanned the user who was responsible.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 10:30 PM
-1

I know what happened. someone knew IRL the user who got spooked and posted completely not-identifying, non-googlable material from her husband's Facebook So someone posted personal information from a husbands social media page. I consider that doxing. The rules state "don't post personal information." There's nothing about quantifying how identifiable that information may or may not be. Furthermore, there was an element of intimidation with this incident. It was perceived as threatening, and cau…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 10:23 PM
2

I can't recall the last time any study or paper etc that suggested men were superior in any given area got a positive public response. http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2014/11/19/study-claims-men-really-are-better-at-navigating-than-women/#comments Local CBS station (aka mainstream attention), with poll results indicating that most people agreed with the article.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 10:17 PM
2

When I was asked why Parkour is such a male dominated discipline, and my answer was because men's bodies are generally better built for this type of physical activity, I was booed down like I was suggesting women need to go back to the kitchen. (This was at a presentation in a semi-public place) Without knowing specifically what you said, I have no way of evaluating this situation. The mere suggestion that men are better at something is considered so sexist and chauvinistic you can't even mentio…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 08:38 PM
3

There are plenty of women out there who get off on both sexual and emotional/psychological domination. Heck, there are women who get off on emotional/psychological domination and don't even care about the physical bondage part. If it's consensual it's fine. In 50SoG it wasn't consensual.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 08:12 PM
3

I know nothing of the book/movie, so I have no dog in that fight, but this statement is so relevant to Red Pill thinking that I just have to point it out. It's relevant to "BP" thinking as well. Our society shames women for wanting sex, so this dynamic exists where women feel ashamed to be in charge of sex. But honestly, only if she were also physically and/or "chemically" attractive, at least in my case and in my observations (obviously, I can't cite a source, lol…) My standards would probably …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 07:19 PM
4

Your support for the alpha bux beta bux theory of female socio-sexual dynamics has been duly noted. I wouldn't say it's exactly AFBB. It's just that what sexually attracts us and what emotionally attracts us often differs. We settle for someone that does a little bit of both. This isn't anything new. I doubt you'd find someone who will disagree. Most men don't go out and marry porn stars, they settle for someone that's sexy, but practical. Would you stick a drooling, lobotomized, IQ < 60 woman s…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 06:59 PM
6

It's all relative. TRP tends to define relationships as a dichotomy. One person is dominant and one person is submissive. I've never had a relationships like that. My wife is essentially an engineering project manager. She's kind of bossy and likes to do stuff her own way, but she never bosses me around. She's very much a dominant personality, but that doesn't mean she controls the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 06:29 PM
9

Is it difficult to find that combination? And how does the dominance work outside the bedroom? I've honestly never met a happy (hetero) couple in which the woman was the dominant one. No, it's not difficult to find. And neither of us is emotionally dominant over the other. I just like that she's independent and that she'll fight back. It's intellectually stimulating. It always turns out that he's beaten down, or she's unsatisfied with his lack of assertiveness. I'm fairly assertive when I care a…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:49 PM
4

Why would they advocate one thing and do something else? Because they're socially progressive. They advocate for personal freedom. That's what social progressivism is all about. They advocate for freedom to marry whoever you want, freedom to have sex with whoever you want, freedom to abort unwanted pregnancies, and freedom to live the way you want. Social progressives don't believe that you should be judged based on your personal choices unless those choices negatively affect others.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:46 PM
12

Stalking her Treating Steele like shit and making her visibly upset, then buying her compliance Isolating her from her family and friends Making her dependent on him for everything Withdrawing affection when she doesn't do whatever he wants That type of stuff. Also, she recognizes that he treats her like shit, but she rationalizes it with "well, he was abused when he was younger. He's just misunderstood and I can change him."
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:34 PM
7

All things being equal, would you consider an intelligent and dominant woman for both relationship and sex? What about an intelligent submissive woman? I would prefer an intelligent and dominant women for a relationship, but I would still have sex with an intelligent submissive women. Basically, I prefer a dominant women outside the bedroom and a submissive women in the bedroom.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:29 PM
9

I would argue that there are definitely elements of abuse, but what relationship is perfect? But this relationship is far from perfect. It's abusive, straight up. What women like about 50SoG is: The sex. Grey is attractive. Also women like the BDSM component. Many women like the man to take control of sex. It absolves them of any responsibility or guilt, since women in our society aren't supposed to like sex. The lifestyle aspect of the novel/movie. You're telling me I can just meet a random bil…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:25 PM
13

If we crave the same dynamics in the sexual and emotional components of our relationships, they why do men and women select different kinds of partners for sex versus dating. Why are we willing to have sex with some people but not marry them? Maybe it's because humans have fundamentally different needs when it comes to emotional and sexual satisfaction. As a man, I can be sexually attracted to a women that's physically appealing but also completely idiotic. She would make a great sex partner, bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:16 PM
7

Why is there this narrative that "wanting to be dominated" is a secret. BDSM is extremely popular. It's also completely different from what TRP describes. BDSM is purely sexual. TRP advocates dominance in sex and emotional aspects of the relationship. You can't conflate the two.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 04:32 PM
14

From what I've seen, feminists aren't criticizing the movie for the sex. Feminists are criticizing the movie because the relationship between Steele and Grey is abusive (psychologically, not physically). And they're definitely correct, in this instance. The relationship depicted is absolutely 100% abusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 04:29 PM
1

.Dissenting opinions are routinely censored and "concern trolling" and most forms of meta-discourse with it is outright banned. Which is ok, because there is a different space for debate - this. It says a lot about people that this sub is so small, while TBP and TRP are considerably larger. Most of us don't want to challenge our beleifs. And if there's anything which looks quite clear, is that blue pillers here resort to non-rational means of debate quite a lot more often then red pillers (ad ho…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 03:40 PM
3

You should search google scholar for "gender differences." You will find thousands of results. There's lots of funding available for this type of research. That said, the field is limmited by technology. Gender is not the same as sex. You cannot suggest that women are genetically worse at math because there's no evidence to support that hypothesis and there's no way to test that hypothesis. You can, however, suggest that women in our society are worse at math. That "in our society" qualifier rec…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 03:33 PM
4

Does that mean there's enough science / sociological studies to back up TRP? Perhaps. But that's not the point. The point is that enough men have noticed the same actions and behaviors from women that when we start comparing notes, patterns emerge. From these patterns, we create theories and devise strategies. With enough men putting these strategies to work, we can again compare notes and see that yes - a lot of things discussed on TRP actually happen, and yes, a lot of these strategies actuall…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 03:26 PM
2

I might try to find it later but I believe it is one of those surveys done here on reddit. Really? Are people honestly posting reddit survey results as scientific fact these days? I seriously hope not.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 03:02 PM
2

What's the source for this? Edit: Just curious since this study found the exact opposite. More men fantasized about cheating than women. http://www.goodinbed.com/psychology_of_sex/what-percentage-of-couples-fantasize-about-cheating-on-each-other/
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:28 AM
12

In my experience, most of the women I've met from TBP take this approach. The vast majority of them are in LTRs. Furthermore, the progressive women in my life are also the women that are least likely to engage in one night stands. Many of the conservative women that I know have slept around and can't maintain a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 05:22 AM
25

There is no proof because we've systematically deleted it all. We take privacy very seriously. I'm very much anti-RP and I'm a regular on SRD. I can vouch that doxing has occured here and on TBP. You will have to take our word for it. Edit: To clarify, what occurred on TBP violated our own stricter definition of doxing, but arguably not reddit's policy on doxing. We have stricter standards on PPD to protect the privacy of our users. It's essential that everyone feel safe when they post here. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 04:57 AM
19

You can ask the TBP mods. I'm very much anti-RP, and I can vouch that doxing occurred. A few of our users have been doxed on PPD. One incident occured on TBP. We're not going to post any proof because we don't want to further violate the privacy of our users. You'll just have to trust us. Edit: To clarify, what occurred on TBP violated our own stricter definition of doxing, but arguably not reddit's policy on doxing. We have stricter standards on PPD to protect the privacy of our users. It's ess…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 04:55 AM
11

It definitely happened. It was on The Blue Pill. The doxed individual was a frequent PPD user. That's really all we can say. Edit: To clarify, what occurred on TBP violated our own stricter definition of doxing, but arguably not reddit's policy on doxing. We have stricter standards on PPD to protect the privacy of our users. It's essential that everyone feel safe when they post here. The TBP mods handled the incident excellently and they're always helpful whenever we have a problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 04:51 AM
3

Sorry, I misread your comment. If someone makes a dumb comment, then you can call them out. As long as you, yourself, follow the guidelines of the sub you won't run into any problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 01:13 AM
2

Take it back. There's no time limmit on editing comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/15 12:07 AM
1

Thanks, but I think you need to be careful about conflating attraction and dating preferences. They are not one in the same. Women in our society are much more willing to forego attraction when it comes to dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 09:19 PM
1

Sure, if you subscribe to the highly acclaimed Scientific Jounral of OK Cupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 09:08 PM
2

Yeah...that just doesn't happen. I've reported users to the admins for doing some pretty crazy shit and they haven't pursued a ban in those instances. tl;dr I'm guessing there was another transgression, but really it's none of our business.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 07:41 PM
2

There's nothing we can do about brigading and/or vote manipulation. We cannot see who is voting on what, so we have no way of knowing which users are brigading. On Reddit, brigading is a site-wide regulation that's generally policed by the admins. Brigaders are generally shadow banned... or chucked if they're complete assholes. Every sizable meta sub inevitably brigades, but mods of large meta subs such as SRD maintain a good relationship with the admins by being ridiculously compliant. The mods…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 07:27 PM
4

We're not banning words. Read the guideline: Any snarky comment that contains mocking terms (alfalfa, white knight) designed to insult, or otherwise perturb users. Circlejerking is any comment that we subjectively perceive to be snarky that also contains mocking terms that are designed to insult users and/or derail the conversation. If there's any confusion because of subjectivity, it's intentional. We want to give ourselves leeway to make decisions that we believe are appropriate.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 07:20 PM
11

This seems more like playing Devil's Advocate than circlejerking to me. They are being sarcastic, but they are responding more or less with what they think BP's would say. That's called a strawman argument. It's generally frowned upon. I can't imagine this conversation will ever happen: You know what PPD needs? No. What? More straw man arguments! Strawman arguments are a common component of circlejerking. There's no better way to confirm your own beliefs while you furiously masterbate your frien…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 02:53 PM
5

Actually, the alfalfa and white knight part has always been part of the guideline. It was in our origional guidelines post way way back. When deployed alongside obvious snark, terms such as white knight don't serve a legitimate purpose other than to piss people off. EDIT: Emphasis added
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 02:47 PM
1

Yeah. I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/15 04:31 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter